39
"I expect every member of the Department to log in, learn it, and incorporate it into your workflows immediately. Al should be in your battle rhythm every single day" says Pete Hegseth (lemmy.ml)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.ml
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

image transcript (via tesseract-ocr)

SECRETARY OF WAR

1000 DEFENSE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1000

DEC - 9 2025

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL DEPARTMENT OF WAR PERSONNEL

SUBJECT: Harness Artificial Intelligence Now with GenAl

I am pleased to introduce GenAl.mil, a secure generative artificial intelligence (Al) platform for every member of the Department of War. It is live today and available on the desktops of all military personnel, civilians, and contractors. With this launch we are taking a giant step toward mass Al adoption across the Department. This tool marks the beginning of a new era where every member of our workforce can be more efficient and impactful.

The first GenAl platform capability is Google Gemini, a frontier Al application that can help you write documents, ask questions, conduct deep research, format content, and unlock new possibilities across your daily workflows. Gemini is the first of several enterprise Al applications that will be rolled out on the GenAI platform. It is secure, certified up to Impact Level 5 (ILS), and is fully authorized to handle CUI.

Victory belongs to those who embrace real innovation. Rather than being reliant on the dusty, antiquated systems of a bygone era, we are thinking ahead here in the Department of War. GenAl.mil is part of this monumental transformation. It removes wasted time and focuses more of our energy into decisive results for the warfighter.

Access is straightforward. Navigate to GenAl.mil and you will be able to access the tool with your CAC. The platform is certified secure for operational use on NIPR.

I expect every member of the Department to log in, learn it, and incorporate it into your workflows immediately. Al should be in your battle rhythm every single day.

It should be your teammate. By mastering this tool, we will outpace our adversaries. The power is now in your hands.

memo via https://xcancel.com/kenklippenstein/status/1998829304856068344

photograph of a memo from pete hegseth, full text of it is in post body

all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 20 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

wtf is this rhetoric. This is like a parody of 1984 or Starship Troopers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    What could possibly go wrong?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    GROK LAND WARRIOR

    GROK LAND WARRIOR

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    81 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 123 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Not only do I expect it to produce nonsensical advice that results in combat losses and other negligence, I also expect it to be used as an excuse to deflect blame for war crimes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 51 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Why did you massacre these unarmed children private?

    I was just following orders sir.

    Who's orders?

    Grok sir.

    Well in that case, I think that ones still breathing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    We are still operating on the basis that carpet bombing works, despite having executed some of the biggest, deadliest, longest, widest, most precise, hottest and expensive bombing campaigns since planes were invented, and, with the exception of dropping nukes on Japan, it has never won a war.

    Not saying AI is smart, but also neither is military command.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 70 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Now taking bets for when the major leak of military secrets will occur

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
    • [–] 49 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Oh boy, it will be doubly difficult now to tell insane policy apart from the hallucinations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 40 points 11 months ago (14 children)

    Battle rhythm?

    The only rhythm this guy has is the aRHYTHMia his heart goes through when he hasn't had a drink and the DTs kick in.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (13 children)

    He uses that term as if it's something that people in the military say. Maybe it is, but it sure seems like a bullshit term.

    But, even if it's a term they use, is "battle rhythm" sounds like something that might happen, I dunno, during a battle? And if you're in the middle of a battle, is that really a time when you should be using AI? "Hey ChatGPT, what -- BOOM -- coordinates should I tell them to use

    ratatatatatatat -- for the -- POW -- artillery strike!?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (12 children)

    It is a term used by the military. Basically it refers to a repetitive workflow. So for instance you have this meeting which occurs every month that requires these deliverables which then feeds into this quarterly meeting which spawns these action items that provide the deliverables to this semi annual meeting which will then trigger a series of tasks that need to be completed in order to prepare for this certain operation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    So, not battle related in any way? It's like one of those guys with wrap-around shades who records tiktoks in his truck talking about his warrior mindset?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    It can be, but that's not the context in which it is being used here. The actual warfighting significance of the "battle rhythm" is derived from the older OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) Loop concept which was how a conflict was to be prosecuted until you were victorious. The idea being that if you could get through your OODA loop faster and more correctly than the opposing side you would outmaneuver and outfight them.

    You would thus have a warfighting battle rhythm which set up the inputs that would feed into a however you were processing the information leading to a decision point that would result in an executable plan to be carried out. You would then observe the follow on impacts of that execution and then the process starts all over again.

    The crux of the idea is that, due to the abundance of practical cases and information gleaned from various exercises, you know exactly how fast you can gather the info, process it, decide and execute and this you can set up a timeline for your entire operation.

    Never turns out that way in practice though due to what our friend Mr. Clausewitz referred to as "friction". It can also lead to indecision as you get stuck on the "observe" and "decide" parts and then folks start chucking the responsibility for that decision upwards as they seek a perfect solution. Which is why I tend to advise "an okay plan applied immediately and vigorously is far better than a perfect plan ten minutes too late".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act)

    Or, as it was known in non-military circles back in the day: "Look before you leap".

    how a conflict was to be prosecuted until you were victorious

    Or dead.

    if you could get through your OODA loop faster and more correctly than the opposing side you would outmaneuver and outfight them.

    Suuuuure....

    Which is why I tend to advise "an okay plan applied immediately and vigorously is far better than a perfect plan ten minutes too late".

    Which obviously depends on what you're planning. If you're planning D-Day, another 10 minutes to get a perfect plan is worth the wait. If you're planning how you're going to attack a machine gun nest that's currently shooting at you, 10 minutes of being shot at might be too long.

    I get that you need to find a balance between completely winging it when planning or fighting a war, vs being caught in analysis paralysis. And, that the more experienced you are, the more you can figure out the optimal balance between the two, and that allows you to be more predictable, which allows higher-ups to have more consistent plans. IMO, this just makes the idea of using AI in your "battle rhythm" even more stupid. Take something where decades of institutional experience allows you to predict a certain "rhythm", now throw AI into the mix and its ability to quickly spit out a plausible looking output that's answer-shaped and you either have to explicitly trust the magic 8-ball's output, or you have to spend an unpredictable amount of time going over the output to see if it is flawed. Either way, you disrupt this rhythm that's apparently so important.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (8 children)

    Actually yes. A not insignificant part of battle planning is to try and disrupt the opposing side's OODA loop. The whole idea was to make it so you could react faster and more appropriately.

    Lots of the tools and information processing systems used in the modern battlefield are designed to quickly take raw data and present that into a format which the decision maker can use to actually make the correct decision.

    Which is why I am leery of using AI in this fashion. Oh sure, if you want to use it to create a briefing note on the forecasted widget usages, meeting minutes about the feasibility of a Christmas party at Montana's or so on, that's fine but to actually parse and data that will result in application of lethal force is a whole different kettle of fish.

    Now yes, there are currently systems that are Auto Engage, but they are very much not AI and the only thing they are generally used for is anti air defense where you have a very limited window in which to successfully prosecute a threat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    A not insignificant part of battle planning is to try and disrupt the opposing side's OODA loop

    That concept has existed long before anyone had ever heard of an "OODA loop". Sun Tzu wrote about "disrupting the opposing side's OODA loop" centuries ago, using different terms.

    Even in WWI it was smoke to prevent them from seeing (observing) clearly. Artillery to disrupt things so they can't make good plans (which was labelled as "orient" for some strange reason). Barbed wire to prevent them from moving, thereby disrupting the "act" phase. Fundamentally since OODA is such a non-obvious acronym for such an obvious and all-encompassing subject, you can frame everything in terms of "disrupting an OODA loop", but that doesn't mean talking about OODA loops is insightful in any way.

    Also, fundamentally that's all secondary to having more troops, greater firepower, more range, etc. If one side has a phalanx and the other side has an attack helicopter, the battle isn't going to come down to whoever has the least disrupted OODA loops.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

    Ah, wonderful that you're familiar with Sun Tzu! Indeed he did write about this, in particular how the acme of generalship was to "balk the enemy's plans". The whole concept has just been refined and reframed using twentieth and twenty-first century terms and context. However, his basic premise remains as true as it was back then.

    Now, most state on state conflict these days isn't phalanx on attack helicopter as both sides have broadly equivalent firepower and capabilities. As such it really does come down to doctrinal differences. For instance, in the First Gulf War, Iraqi C2 was crippled via precision attacks which severely hampered their ability to respond to Coalition ground attack. Yes, the Abrams and the Challenger tanks heavily outclassed the Iraqi armour, however, it was due to the Coalition having overwhelming situational awareness and being able to exploit the weaknesses that developed after the initial strikes.

    I must say, I am truly enjoying this discussion! You bring up some really good points!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    As such it really does come down to doctrinal differences

    Not for the US. The US hasn't had to face a near peer enemy since WWII. When was the last time the US didn't have air supremacy in a conflict? They had it even in Korea and Vietnam and since then the advantage has only grown. Plus now it's not just air, it's satellites and drones. That allows the US to use GPS-guided weapons, or use GPS to move forces, with satellites and drones to verify that the path is clear. Also, US air supremacy means the US can strike any enemy target in any position from the air, knocking out enemy communications, radar, power, ammo dumps, etc.

    For instance, in the First Gulf War, Iraqi C2 was crippled via precision attacks which severely hampered their ability to respond to Coalition ground attack

    Yes -- attack helicopters vs. phalanxes. How was the US able to perform these precision attacks? Its overwhelming advantage in firepower, tech, etc. meant that it quickly established air supremacy and was able to strike Iraqi targets at will. It's not that Iraq didn't think of crippling the US forces in the same way, it's that it was completely unable to do that because of the US superiority in numbers, tech and firepower.

    Yes, the Abrams and the Challenger tanks heavily outclassed the Iraqi armour, however, it was due to the Coalition having overwhelming situational awareness

    Which was the result of a massive difference in tech, plus complete air supremacy allowing them to completely disrupt any Iraqi communication. The US could have been using WWII Sherman tanks and still would have won because they had control of the skies and were able to use that to isolate Iraqi units. And, that's not to mention that the US tanks had night vision systems while the Iraqis didn't, so a lot of engagements were designed to happen at night when the Iraqis were blind and the US forces could see clearly.

    The US victory in the first Iraq war had nothing to do with the US being clever and disrupting Iraq's "OODA loops" and everything to do with the US having a massive advantage in tech, firepower, etc.

    If you wanted to look at a conflict where the side with the better doctrine is having a better result, you could look at Ukraine vs. Russia. Russia has a huge manpower advantage, and started the war with a huge advantage in equipment. But, Russia is famous for having rigid command structures and top-heavy decision making. Ukraine isn't winning the war, but just not losing is a major achievement given all the advantages Russia has. And, at least some of that comes down to Ukraine having much better visibility into what Russia is doing (thanks in part to US and European tech) allowing them to make better decisions, so that when they act they have a better chance of success. Russia's ability to see what Ukraine is doing is weaker because they lack the latest NATO tech, and they make worse decisions and make those decisions slower because of the structure of their military. So, Ukraine's information and control structure advantages are helping offset the disadvantage they face because they're so much smaller than Russia.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (4 children)

    I would argue that one of the major advantages that our friends in Ukraine have is that they are using both playbooks. Consider, for the great majority of the twentieth century, the Ukrainian Forces were a vitally integral part of the USSR and thus learned to fight in the Soviet style. However, upon the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainians began to develop closer ties with NATO and NATO aligned countries, thus learning some of our battle strategy, which was, for the most part, designed to counter the USSR and their way of warfare. So essentially, they know what the Russians will likely try and also they know what steps should be taken to counter those actions.

    I suspect we have strayed somewhat from the original topic under discussion, but that's fine with me!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    My guess is that since Russia invaded Ukraine there have been a lot of Americans and other NATO people spending time in Ukraine, teaching and training. Most of it is probably done in a quiet, plausibly deniable way. Like, former soldiers hired through a private foundation that has a secret donor list. It would be very cheap for NATO countries to do, and it could be very effective. Even if countries can't get their public to agree to ship weapons to Ukraine, European leaders almost certainly know that Russia is a major threat, and as soon as it defeats Ukraine that threat will be aimed at them. A small investment now to keep Ukraine fighting means less needs to be spent later if Russia wins.

    Anyhow, my point is that that's one of the few modern conflicts where there are near-peer forces fighting each-other. In the earliest days of the invasion Russia's advantage over Ukraine might have been as big as the US advantage over Iraq. But, since then with training, arms, ammunition and tech from NATO countries, Ukraine is probably on par with Russia in some ways, and ahead of them in others, though still way behind in total manpower. Because of that, I think it's one of the few conflicts where the conflict won't simply be decided by the side with the newest tech or the side with the biggest army. Instead it's one where disrupting the opposition's surveillance, analysis, planning and execution can have the greatest impact.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    The Ukrainians received a lot of training from our side prior to the current conflict. One example being OP UNIFIER which was the CAF contribution that trained the Ukrainian Forces.

    I think a big advantage that the Ukrainians have currently is that the western/NATO battle doctrine encourages (theoretically) initiative and action at all rank levels whilst the Russian doctrine seems to require strict obedience to hierarchy. Something that was trained into us was "if you have no idea what to do next, win the war/act decisively".

    What do you think might be some good steps for Ukraine after the conflict and if they are victorious? I think one of the areas that Ukraine was definitely lacking in at the outset was their Naval forces. I'd suggest that a small professional submarine force would be a good place for them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Even if Ukraine "wins" the war, they're in massive trouble. A big fraction of their working-age population is dead or severely injured. A lot of their infrastructure is badly damaged or destroyed. For a short time they're going to have a niche as one of the few countries that has expertise in fighting a war against a big, modern, well-equipped opponent. Maybe they can find a way to generate money from that. But, if they're not careful it will just result in Ukrainians emigrating with that expertise to take up consultant type roles in other countries.

    I think the last think Ukraine wants to do after a conflict like this is to maintain a large standing military. They can't afford that either financially, or afford taking prime-age people out of other jobs. So, I think they're hoping to have a small military and have the UN or NATO take up the slack of defending their borders.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago*

    I'd have to agree with you there. War is a most terrible thing and even if you "win" it often is a most costly and painful affair. I think the point you make is correct that it's likely that NATO or the UN is going to have to enforce some sort of border agreement. Unfortunately, that's the way things are when you aren't a super power.

    I can see the Ukrainian Forces develop into a very niche specialist outfit, in particular with emphasis on drone warfare. They will obviously have to demob after the cessation of hostilities but they will definitely have a core of good professional fighters.

    Thank you so much for the conversation by the way!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 28 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Is Petey on the sauce again?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 24 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    How can anyone with a sound mind trust a guy who used a public chat program for top secrete military actions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    It wasn't public, didn't he use a fork made by an Israeli company that removed the message encryption and "securely" archived everything on a remote server where hackers (and other foreign states) could download everything?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [+] 23 points 11 months ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 23 points 11 months ago

    Sorry about rolling that grenade under your bunk Mr. Secretary, GenAI told me to do it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 21 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    I hope the plague wipes his entire family line. Seriously. Black death? Take this one. We don't need him.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 19 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    “dEpArTmEnT oF wAr!”

    I expect this to be written in sharpie on a cardboard box with the letter “r” backwards.

    What a bunch of fucking children.

    I can’t imagine the level of reality one must suspend to live with the shame and embarrassment that comes from having voted for this trash.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 18 points 11 months ago

    "We can't spell the Department of War without AI" - Pete Kegsdeath

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 18 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Literally hard piping the entirety (remainder) of military intelligence to the highest bidder. Goddamn America is gonna kill America in the most American way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 17 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    I miss thinking the general populace might understand sweet fuckall about computers someday.

    *sighs, drinks*

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Isn't this just proof they don't understand a thing about computers?...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    AI is being peddled to govt to stave off the bubble bursting.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    I’m sure it’s a little bit keeping the economy afloat for a little longer while also a bit of jumping on the opportunity to have as many fake bullshit pictures as possible in a time when president pedo is at risk of legitimate photos leaking.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 15 points 11 months ago

    Had to use daddy's sharpie to sign

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 14 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Go ahead Trumpmerica, shoot yourself in the foot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 22 points 11 months ago*

    Battle rhythm?

    Who is this insufferable little twat?

    This freak has his head so far up rich tech bro's assholes he could lick their tonsils.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 10 points 11 months ago

    Cringe

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 10 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    AI probably wrote Hegseth's email, TBH.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 10 points 11 months ago

    A lot of people are going to start dying because of AI hallucinations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 9 points 11 months ago

    Ⓑⓐⓣⓣⓛⓔ Ⓡⓗⓨⓣⓗⓜ

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 8 points 11 months ago

    Jesus.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    It looks like from a low budget science fiction parody movie from the 80s

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    When is Grok being onboarded. Then the real shit show starts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Kegseth embraces the brainrot

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    read Hannah Arendt. evil thrives when moral apathy is the norm. kegseth is implementing peter thiel and elon musk's grand designs to kill en masse

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    War thunder 'bout to get a whole expansion pack

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    Reads like it was written by AI

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Coincidentally Behind the Bastards is talking about Nuclear armageddom in a 5-part series this week and oh hell they're a shred of a veil from plugging this into the armageddon trigger and killing us all.

    I'm beginning to think "Be nice to ai because it will be an all powerful god" was the plan, not a crackpot excuse for fascism...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    Do I go to HR with those highly inappropriate for the workplace comments that my AI navigator made towards me? How the F is one going to counsel some AI into NOT saying all the shit it was programmed to say? Best of luck ya’ll.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [+] -18 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

    First of all, fucking LOL at Google Gemini being secure. They are really setting themselves up for failure here. But something tells me they don't care and they never will because they never will be held accountable for this colossal fuckup Stevie Wonder could see a mile off.

    Second, he's right that wars will be won by those who embrace innovation. Pretending AI doesn't exist or hating it isn't a great strategy in a war with an opponent who is using it. I'm actually reading a book right now, that takes place in 2026 but was written in, I think 2009? And it's about a secret military organisation (out of Japan) building AI "people" for the purpose of having them fully man drones. AI-based pilots, basically, but they think they're real people and are capable of the same level of thought as we are. (Of course this is science fiction, but you think they aren't thinking about that? Or that it's even that crazy that it couldn't happen next year?) (The book is volume 10 of Sword Art Online, which was adapted into the third season of the anime of the same name. They do talk about this stuff in the third and fourth seasons, but the books go way further into detail.)

    So, much as I don't like it (and think it's funny that they can trust a data broker's AI), I agree with Hegseth on that one point. They have to match wits and tech with the enemy or risk being overrun. They don't have to like the weapons of the battlefield, but they damn sure better be prepared to face them, either with similar armaments of their own, or something different that can counter it (e.g. virus vs virus, or virus vs firewall).

    Edit: But with regards to SAO, I mean we already have self-driving cars, so self-driving drones shouldn't even be that far off, if we don't already have them. I think SAO got way too wordy with what a self-driving drone really needs to be. Like Kawahara says it needs to be a full person with morality and all that? No the fuck it doesn't. It just needs to be able to identify a target and launch weapons at it or crash into it. That's it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago

    Absolute techbro brain. Something literally appears in my favorite sci-fi media, therefore it should and must exist even if it's clearly a bad thing in the context of the media (we have built the torment nexus). I honestly think a lack of media literacy is driving a huge portion of tech nonsense, a complete inability to read anything into a text and understand the societal and human impact of the things being discussed. Instead it's "I'm all out of big ideas, time to mine 80's movies for things to pitch to investors".

    LLMs and genAI in general is a fill in the blank machine. What possible use in military strategy could they provide?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    First of all, fucking LOL at Google Gemini being secure.

    Look, I'm all for hating on AI. I also have zero love for any of the tech giants. But this is a just plain ignorant statement. Google and most every cloud services provider have sovereign cloud offerings. Accessing any data above Unclassified is progressively more difficult. Humans are the weak link in the security chain.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    Oh, you're definitely right about humans being the weak link in security. I also don't doubt that AI can be hardened to be secure.

    I just don't trust Google. You're free to if you like, but I won't do it. That's not coming from me being a subscriber to the "Fuck AI" community, that comes from me being somewhat of a privacy advocate (at least, for my own, if I'm being honest — though, everyone should recognise their own privacy needs, and work to protect it to the extent they need).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    8 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 13 points 11 months ago

    The dusty, antiquated systems of a bygone era won't leave you stranded half-dead on a battlefield. GenAI will.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    So...going forward, all government documents are going to be signed with a sharpie?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    Found my next prompt injection target.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    I retired from the US military 3 years ago and I'm glad I left when I did. I absolutely wouldn't put up with this BS if I was still serving, as well as every other BS order that drunken frat boy Nazi gives. One Trump regime was enough.

    That said, is this letter legit? The letterhead looks real enough, but there's no printed signature block at the bottom, just his signature. Have military documents changed format in only a few years since I left? Signature blocks are always required. The military is very strict on their protocols, so I'm surprised it's omitted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Gonna say it's real.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    it's already pulling triggers on it's own. 'supervised'

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    "GenAI, is this order legal?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •