Don Stockbauer <donstockbauer@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 3:01=A0pm, "rick++" <rick...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 27, 12:42 pm, c...@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > "rick++" <rick...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I wonder if "killer robot planes" used by the
> > > > United States in middle east wars count.
> > > > People in these countries claim its a form
> > > > of terrorism to have planes come "out of the blue"
> > > > and bomb them. =A0Countrer-reports like a recent
> > > > 60 Minutes story says the military goes through
> > > > several level of decision before allowing a kill.
> > > > They take colalteral damage of killing civilians
> > > > seriously.
> >
> > > Not really. =A0All the UAVs are remotely operated by humans currently
> > > s=
> o it's
> > > no different than having a solder pointing a gun and pulling the
> > > trigge=
> r or
> > > the air force dropping bombs.
> > > None the less, it's not yet an AI issue. =A0However, once they have
> > > the decisions made by some AI technology on who to kill and who not
> > > to kill=
> ,
> > > then we will have reached the point of having to fear the AIs.
> >
> > A lot of of the signal collection and discrimination is delegated to
> > automated
> > sensors in orbit or drones. =A0And the data-mining is routinely
> > blackbox computing.
> > Agreed, a human intervenes in the decision to send the final bomb or
> > bullet,
> > although the bomb or bullet is then fully computerized.
> >
> > Just becasue the "A.I." isnt contained in a two-meter humanoid shell,
> > doesnt mean
> > that substantial parts of the system are highly computerized and
> > automated.
> >
> > So when the bomb hits the wrong target, how much of the decision was
> > due to
> > humans and how much was computer-aided? =A0Its not black and white
> > anymore.
>
> Must be nice to be able to kill safely from a sequestered location.
> Let's hope that such power never falls into irresponsible hands.

My understanding is that it's fairly easy to buy things like sniper rifles
here in VA (the home of the NRA). :)

We had the beltway sniper(s) killing 11 people a few years back using just
such technology (kill at a safe distance) technology. :)  Though it's not
as powerful as a UAV with rockets, it's just as deadly.  The bottom line,
is that bad things do happen, but we deal with the problem long before we
have global melt downs, and in the end, not many people die (per the big
picture).

I think all the dangers of AI will work the same as the dangers of all past
technologies.  People will worry about it. Some mistakes will be made from
not worrying enough, people will be harmed, or killed, we will learn from
each mistake, and add a little more protection as needed to reduce the odds
of it getting worse.  Life goes on.  We use the AI as best we can without
the risk getting too large.

-- 
Curt Welch                                            http://CurtWelch.Com/
curt@kcwc.com                                        http://NewsReader.Com/