[ozgung]

Do I understand this correctly:

An algorithm, an ML model trained to predict next tokens to write meaningful text, is going to KILL actual humans by itself.

So killing people is legal,

Killing people by a random process is legal,

A randomized algorithm deciding on who to kill is legal,

And some of you think you are legally protected because they used the word “domestic”?

[mpalmer]

I don't think you do?

Who said that any of it is legal? Keeping in mind that when the government does something, it usually takes more than 24h for there to be an official determination on whether they broke the law.

[nsvd2]

Well, DHS has shown this year that they won't show restraint when it comes to attacking American citizens. I would expect that trend to continue.

[boxedemp]

Killing people has been legal forever. But you have to do it at scale for it to be legal.

[booleandilemma]

Is it possible the killing machine could hallucinate and kill some random, innocent person?

[sumeno]

It's incredibly unlikely that it won't do exactly that, although we'll be very lucky if it's just that and not a random, innocent city

[phtrivier]

Verhoeven fans would simply call it "a glitch".

[boxedemp]

It's already happened in the Korean DMZ

[techpression]

Domestic means nothing, it’s like the company Daniel Ek invested in saying they won’t sell weapons to ”Democracies”, in the context of warfare and control these words are meaningless.

They will deploy this on a domestic scale and claim to use it to locate non-domestic threats. I can’t believe anyone is falling for this.