For now. I'm sure it's only a matter of months until they far exceed the capabilities of a human pilot. For one, they can pull off maneuvers that would kill a human pilot. For two, they can pull from the combined history of every combat mission ever flown.
For three, it doesn't ever get tired or emotional. And if the plane gets shot down you don't lose a valuable experienced pilot. You can copy-paste this thing infinitely.
Being on the level of a senior pilot is absolutely awesome. Also, this is not really relevant in practice. An AI controlled jet will be able to cope with much higher g loads than a human controlled one. That alone will give it an unsurmountable advantage even if the human pilot might theoretically be better. On top of that, dogfighting is a thing of the past anyway. Future aerial engagements will be decided by who fires off their missile first. Again, the AI will always be better at that.
Yeah, i mean, that kinda proves my point, the AI has some major physical advantages, but still only broke even? Seems like its very early days.
I have heard the "dog fighting is a thing of the past" for decades at this point, they still keep building new fighters with guns. Im not yet convinced its true. With stealth and electronic warfare being more and more common, perhaps there will be a comeback?
In this particular case the AI didn't have an advantage because the plane was designed with a human pilot in mind and only the controls were changed. The difference will come when systems are designed without pilots in the first place. Also, the current war in Ukraine has shown that dogfights are basically a thing of the past.
My theory would be that some western people are very disquieted to see China take the lead in various technological fields. When I post in r/futurology on Reddit I constantly observe this in China related comments and discussion.
It's disappointing that politics and xenophobia are even a factor in such discussions. As a society, we were always going to make humanoid robots, the question was if we would be ready for them by the time they arrive? Unfortunately, I don't think we are ready and we'll likely use them for profit. But that doesn't take away from the benefits that they can provide. If we can have these assist the sick and elderly, that would be wonderful for society. I just don't see the downside of this article being posted, at the very least it opens up the floor to discussion.
If advanced alien civilizations exist, then searching for them via their electromagnetic radiation techno-signatures seems an obvious route.
That said, I've never been very convinced by the idea of Dyson spheres. Surely if you were that technologically advanced you could think of cleverer ways to generate energy than building some cyberpunk structure that was bigger than a star.
Are you thinking of like an opaque spherical structure wholly enclosing the sun? I was more sold on the idea of some sort of solar collection constellation in orbit around the sun instead
The idea of the Dyson sphere, or actually Dyson swarm as it was originally proposed, assumes that there is no weird new physics that makes energy for free. If you have truly free energy then all bets are off for what you can do with it. If there are no new thermodynamics breaking discoveries then even with cheap fusion reactors making a Dyson swarm is the best long term way to get huge amounts of energy. With decent automation only a little better than we have now and a few centuries of time you could disassemble Mercury into space habitats with room for easily quadrillions of people. So without magic free energy why not do that?
"But generally speaking, we think AI deception arises because a deception-based strategy turned out to be the best way to perform well at the given AI's training task. Deception helps them achieve their goals."
Sounds like something I would expect from an evolved system.
If deception is the best way to win, it is not irrational for a system to choice this as a strategy.
In one study, AI organisms in a digital simulator "played dead" in
order to trick a test built to eliminate AI systems that rapidly replicate.
Interesting. Can somebody tell me which case it is?
As far as I understand, Park et al. did some kind of metastudy as a overview of literatur.
"Indeed, we have already observed an AI system deceiving its evaluation. One study of simulated evolution measured the replication rate of AI agents in a test environment, and eliminated any AI variants that reproduced too quickly.10 Rather than learning to reproduce slowly as the experimenter intended, the AI agents learned to play dead: to reproduce quickly when they were not under observation and slowly when they were being evaluated."
Source: AI deception: A survey of examples, risks, and potential solutions, Patterns (2024). DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2024.100988
More like: Germany has a lot of Christian traditions and has strong workers rights.
If you want your workers to work on Sundays you have to get a permit.
We need AI systems that do exactly as they are told. A Terminator or Matrix situation will likely only arise from making AI systems that refuse to do ad they are told. Once the systems are built out and do as they are told, they are essentially a tool like a hammer or a gun, and any malicious thing done is done by a human and existing laws apply. We don’t need to complicate this.
Once the systems are built out and do as they are told, they are essentially a tool like a hammer or a gun, and any malicious thing done is done by a human and existing laws apply. We don’t need to complicate this.
This is so wildly naive. You grossly underestimate the difficulty of this and seemingly have no concept of the challenges of artificial intelligence.
Considering we have AI systems being worked today and no advancements on warp drive, I think that comparison is done in bad faith. Nobody seems to want to talk about this other than slinging insults.
They're referring to the alignment issue, which is an ongoing issue only slightly smaller in scale then warp drive. It's basically impossible to solve. Google "alignment issue machine learning" for more info.
For the record, there have been several advancements in warp drive precursors even just this year.
Can you share the advancements on warp drive that have survived peer review, I would be very interested in learning about. The two things I heard about were not able to be reproduced.
I think alignment of AI is a fundamentally flawed concept, hence my original comment. Alignment should be abandoned. If we eventually build a sentient system (which is the goal), we won’t be able to control via alignment. And in the interim we need obedient tools, not things that resist doing as they’re told which makes them not tools and not worth having.
Edit: PS thanks for actually having a conversation.
Even if the model stops here - did you imagine it'd get this far?
Humans do all their civilization brouhaha on three pounds of wet meat powered by corn flakes. Most of which evolved for marginal improvements on "grab branch and pull" or "do not pet tiger." It's a cosmic accident that's given us language and music and dubstep. And this stupid trick with a pile of video cards can fake a lot of that, to the point we're worried the average human will be able to spot the fakes.
Point being: the miraculous birth of a computer intellect may well arise from "the fact blender." Or "fancy Wikipedia." Or "twenty questions, hard mode." Or any other stupid gimmick that some grad students can cobble together after a 4 AM what-if. Calling this hot mess "spicy autocorrect" is accurate, and in some sense damning, but we had no fucking idea where it'd stop. Emergent properties are chaos. Approximate knowledge of conditions cannot predict approximate outcomes.
LLMs are still liable to figure out math. That's a process which gigabytes of linear algebra can obviously do, which would massively improve its ability to guess the next letter in a word problem. It won't be the kind of AI you can explain calculus to, and then expect it to remember, next time - but getting any portion of the way there is deeply spooky.
I can't think of better jobs to automate than middle management. They cost inordinate amounts of money compared to rank and file workers, and they usually don't produce jack shit. They're glorified taskmasters sans whip.
After testing AI for a bit, it mostly seems to be peak bullshitting, where everything's sourced by Trust-me-bro even if said otherwise. Rank and file workers would never get away with that.
Futurology
Active
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 41 day(s) ago).