Hacker News Reader

Comment by tedajax | Hacker News Reader

Literally nothing in this article seems like something that will actually come to pass.

It's like a bad Black Mirror fanfic.

The scale may be exaggerated and the particulars may be wrong, but there definitely will be new problems that arise from cheap and effective remote/autonomous weapons being available. In addition to cheap IED drones which are already becoming available, what happens when you can pop a vision system + grasper arm securely around a rifle and effectively toss it up on a ridge somewhere? It's probably been technically possible for a while, but soon it'll be (relatively) cheap, and probably hard to monitor.

Agreed and the vaguely proposed solution for their hypothesized problem sounds far worse than the problem.

And, on that note, sounds like it would do effectively nothing to even address the problem in the first place.

Came to say exactly this...

Not quite sure how the author went from "Technology is, in other words, enabling criminals to target anyone anywhere and, due to democratization, increasingly at scale" to "One strategy could be a superintelligent machine—essentially, an extremely powerful algorithm—that’s specifically designed to govern fairly".

> Of course, this is a fantastical proposal. Even the real-world use of AI in the justice system is fraught with problems. But at this point, do we have a better idea for preventing the collapse of the state system under the weight of widespread technological empowerment?

I'm not sure what motivated this sort of soundbite-style quoting without digging in further, but I hope if you first read the comments without the article you realize this is supposed to pose a question, not offer a solution.

I'm not judging the solution, just the logic that skipped from "Omniviolence" to the absurd proposal for an AI-based government authority. The two are quite unrelated in my mind.

For example, the article made no serious mention of counter-measures such as string (which can down a drone), detection (RF directional antennae), or even just "plant more trees" (as trees make drone navigation more complicated - I know from personal experience).

Just broadcasting random RF/VHF/UHF noise (there are only so many channels available) at drones can wreak havoc.

Quite seriously, do a web search for "can you spot the source of a drone controller", and you will find a wealth of information from RF source detection, to the GPS coordinates of the controller (so the drone can "return home") - there a TON of alternatives that any "scholar" should research before even hinting at a doom-and-gloom alternative such as AI-based government.

While basically all the omniviolence scenarios would induce the state to trust individuals less, which is kind of the thrust of the article, climate change can still induce more frequent heatwaves and make things difficult for more people. Whether it will reach the threshold of societal collapse is a more difficult question.

Really?

I'm just waiting for some dumbass to take a cheap chinese drone, attach a blasting cap with a shape charge laced with sodium cyanide. Anybody nicked with fragments would die.

And it'd cost what, $80-$100 ?

It's the endgame of asymmetric warfare.

Drone + cluster bomblet, cheep.

That sort of thing scares me more than weapons of mass destruction. Because they are usable by non-nation state actors and rouge nation state actors.

It's not that I'm worried anyone's going to try to take me out (like why?). It's I'm worried what sort of society we end up with when people like Larry Ellison are terrified of the above.

Larry Ellison in the grand scheme of things is a turd who while he has probably pissed enough people off hasn't pissed off anyone enough to try to flush him with extreme prejudice.

I'd be more worried about people of actual importance like police chiefs, prosecutors, senators, presidents.

Not signalling anyone out, pick a name any name tho. Consider though where I live no one gives a flying fuck what I say. Because nothing I say is going to upend anyone with any real power.

There are other places where I'd stick out like a nail.

It's I'm worried what sort of society we end up with when people like Larry Ellison are terrified of the above.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Do you by chance have a manifesto I could peruse?

> Do you by chance have a manifesto I could peruse?

Are you insinuating something?

The working draft is titled, Nobody Here but a Small Brained Primate.

I'm actually quite a bit more worried about some dumbass tossing things off the overpass at my car. Rocks are free.

I thought drones in warzones have already been used to target people and explode at head level.

Maybe not crates of miniaturized ones with facial recognition, but precursors.

The scale is so different that it’s not really the same thing. It’s like comparing a mortar to an orbital bombardment with rail-guns. Yes both involve sending a projectile at a target at high speed but they aren’t remotely similar.

Consumer grade drones are already being used in combat in the middle east: https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2017/01/11/...

(All the better sources for these stories are paywalled, so have fun reading them)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com