▲ 230 ▼ Over 200 organizations call for a ban on "artificial intelligence" in military kill chains (burgasmedia.com) submitted 4 months ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/technology@lemmy.world 6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] MangoCats@feddit.it 13 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago what about both? permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago false equivalence. that's like saying in defense of war crimes, sue the weapons and war vehicles, and see how they defend themselves in court. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago what about both? permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago false equivalence. that's like saying in defense of war crimes, sue the weapons and war vehicles, and see how they defend themselves in court. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago false equivalence. that's like saying in defense of war crimes, sue the weapons and war vehicles, and see how they defend themselves in court. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago false equivalence. that's like saying in defense of war crimes, sue the weapons and war vehicles, and see how they defend themselves in court. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[+] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago* because the point of my example is that neither case works like that. you can't sue weapons, you sue those who commanded their use. you can't sue transistors.. and what does that mean? it means you sue those that commanded the use of AI assisted weapons. common sense, really. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies) load more comments (-2 replies)
[+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago I read this as implying whwt I say does not make sense: Sue a transistor, see how it conducts itself. permalink fedilink source parent replies: [+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-2 replies)
[+] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago B - who in their right mind would think that a transistor is a legitimate target of a lawsuit? someone who wants to intentionally misunderstand the situation, wrecking the discussion. I'm not saying you did that, but it's not rare on forums like this. permalink fedilink source parent