Would this make SAFEnetwork a lifesaver, or its users into targets?
they wouldn’t be able to datamine the safe network so I would have to cast my vote as the safe network being a “lifesaver”.
Plus it’s the government and they can’t do anything correctly or accurately. Also I wouldnt lose sleep on it; just because the government is planning on it. Doesn’t mean they create reality or that it will necessarily come into fruition.
Surely I’m not the only one that has thought about the potential of the SAFE network for ‘hitman for hire’-services/‘marketplace’ or comparable misuses?
For example I guess ransomware is popular now because it is not easy to track the ‘anonymous’ receiver of the payed bitcoins.
I wish news like this would release the forum guidelines on the usage of certain expletives and the minimum post length, because then I could’ve summarized my stance on the matter in only four letters.
Unfortunately, not all institutions sponsored by the government are as clueless as the government that sponsors them. Just think NSA: they were good enough at what they are doing that 1) nobody noticed (“guessing” doesn’t count), 2) they delivered crazy results.
Looking at the current state of AI image recognition, I was already thinking stuff like racially profiling face recognition and targeting for guns is at most a few years away. Honestly, it might already exist.
Stuff like an autonomous fleet (“swarm”) of boats was already demonstrated:
You mean the organization that couldn’t prevent a single man (Edward Snowden) from leaking the largest amount of classified information that the world has ever seen?
I’m only playing devils advocate and in large part I agree with you. I just do not believe in the nonsense they feed us that government is this omniscient all knowing being.
Modern society goes and denies God, then go and make government out to be God. It’s ridiculous!
Some humans program machines to kill, fun fact, humans are programmed by nature to pass away.
When humans program themselves to presumably stay alive forever, cocktails in the universe will intoxicate that fountain of youth. Cheers
I get you, but the real issue is that it is a monstrous operation (“your worst conspiracy theories, except for reals”) involving thousands of people, yet it took an awful lot of time before it was leaked.
Yes, it was the result of a single man standing up for what he believed was right, but do you realize that it makes it even worse? Statistically speaking… but wait! you can’t “speak statistically” on numbers like this: this leak can be considered no more than a freak accident. There’s no reason it had to happen then and not 2, 5, or 20 years later… not a happy thought.
EDIT: To answer your question: no, I don’t believe “The Government” is an omniscient entity or whatnot, but the NSA story kind of proofs that huge number of people will happily and unquestioningly comply when they are told to do immoral things if it’s in the name of the above mentioned entity.
what did I say again, about the use of autonomous machines and why I think it is a bad idea ?
We finance our own mass graves.
The US government made nuclear weapons and the internet and the moon landing and at least helped win WW2, and according to some launched Tesla, and MIT and CalTech and Berkley UC system, Library of Congress… might want to rethink its guaranteed ineptitude.
Here’s an article to a 13 year old who made a nuclear reactor in his basement:
Anything government can do the private sector can do better.
Government doesn’t innovate it hires contractors and throws massive amounts of stolen money at them.
No, J. Robert Oppenheimer created the atomic bomb - the government only funded it with stolen taxpayer money.
The Department of Defense didn’t innovate the internet. It funded the advanced research project DARPA who hired a couple nerds from Bell Labs.
It didn’t “launch Tesla” it FUNDED TESLA with stolen taxpayer money.
Elon Musk although brilliant many ways in his own right - simply looked for subsidies from the U.S. government in fields that the government wanted developed.
That’s how he started his company, on the backs of American taxpayers. I’m not blaming him because quite frankly small businesses here in the U.S. have been so tightly regulated and taxed it’s hard to build a competitive company.
My issue is those subsidies shouldn’t have been there to begin with.
Now if you think it’s okay for the government to go around funding projects with stolen money just read the article that started this thread, and realize it’s exactly how we came to this point.
I wonder how efficient AI is at picking up sarcasm…
There is no way to argue against the corporate state in favor of the corporation. There are no sectors there is just the public.
The danger is that a large enough state can hand an uncompromising amount of resources and cover to people with an uncompromising vision and achieve undesirable technical results to further oppression.
What you’re you’re trying to argue for is a business first approach. Death is preferable, and you would likely know that if you were’t confusing business propaganda with understanding. That corporate state you’re railing against is the highest expression of corporatism.
Risking that I’m taking this too seriously: we’re getting there. Sentiment analysis is an active research area for things like product comments, market prediction, etc. and one of the challenges is sarcasm.
The problem is that we have two parties (well, two separate sides) working together:
- a largely immoral government (should I say “inept at morality”?) that is setting the direction which, in the cases of the development of nuclear weapons and the implementing of mass surveillance, was very very bad
- a largely efficient and professional (but also morally inept) executive body (e.g. the NSA)
The results are not so rosy.