Hobbyist Builds AI-Assisted Rifle Robot Using ChatGPT
zmescience.com
zmescience.com
Its not actually needed or useful for that system.
the object tracking is the bit thats actually needed. Converting speech->text->vectors is really not that that useful.
Its perfectly possible to build self contained offline, reasonably accurate "anti-human" gun turret now. You don't need chatGPT for that. If you're in a hurry, YOLO will do most of the work for you.
You might need it to raise money from people with too much cash though.
edit ok so whats actually hard then?
Detecting "enemies" in anything other than a small room is actually quite hard. Sure you can detect motion, but getting a range on that "enemy" is tricky.
Sure you can use camera arrays, but that only give you ~30 meters without extra resolution. Radar works, but then you either have to get good at human classification with radar (perfectly possible, but no where near as off the shelf as camera based models)
An Oak-D long range stereo camera has an 8% error at 300m though. Could also use a 1D lidar.
The hard part is the sensor fusion, blending wide angle imprecise sensors with precise but narrow field of view sensors. I mean its possible to do in opensource (I'm doing it currently, and I don't really have a computer vision background) However I'm only using cameras, as radar is too far removed from my knowledge base to productive.
But most people think it’s cool.
It’s entertainment.
But yeah, the AI part is absolutely not interesting at all.
If he’s serious, getting banned from ChatGPT isn’t much of an issue because a locally running LLM is perfectly capable of the same.
I wonder how effectively they can enforce a ban… there are ways of buying OAI completions where you never even reveal your identity.
Analogously, with a lot of grey area stuff, a person can almost surely get away with it ... but not if they post it online and it gets attention.
yes they can flag certain prompts, true
They don't want that the bad publicity when that goes wrong of course, but the prevailing concerns are (1) giving allied politicians room to say "they care! see how they try!" as they try to shape regulation into a moat, and (2) preventing competition against their own projects and products for large "defense" institutions
They're just making sure that this kind of use isn't normalized or presumed -- a much lower standard than eradicating it completely.
Large defense contractors build their own systems: Some of the best tools for CAD, SCADA, CAM and project-management come from companies like Thales and Dassault. I also have it on good authotity that major US defense contractors' people are very explicitly banned from interacting with any non-local-hosted LLM.
Whereas, uncensored LLMs (and the like) with knowledge of firearms and explosives manufacturing are a public-health risk for sure, but not a national-security risk.
Everyone's concerned about what AI will bring, but it's worth looking at what past things it shows. We have been robots for real.
Hopefully politics, sociology, psychology, and economics will have evolved enough in the past 100 years so we don't face the losses that were experienced in the first half the 20th century.
That is awesome and terrifying.
So what is different in practice here ?
Them becoming much cheaper / smaller / more accurate ? (See Ukraine vs Russia.)
(When does this compensate for lower payload and speed ?)
Meaning also much more accessible to terrorists ?
(And the suicide kind, since the government will find you.
But then real suicide terrorists I would assume would find it much more appealing to do it by themselves, since that comes with a promise of paradise, virgins, you know the drill...)
Minus a decade, if not more — I personally had (and then rejected) that specific idea as a world-building element in the novel I've still not finished writing.
(I'm not sure when Robert Miles did an eye tracking laser turret, or even if I dreamed it, but if he did it, it was also ages ago now).
Similarly, why would you want to target an individual with an AI laser weapon to blind them? To kill them, sure, like the Israeli assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, but not to blind them.
But I guess not meaningfully in practice : see the recent "exploding pagers" operation...
my question though is, are words like cynicism and pessismism useable except in an ironic sense?
ChatGPT follows absurd rules.
One might reasonably expect something like "As an AI language model, I can't provide targeting commands to your rifle's servos", but that is not what you get. It complies happily, while refusing to engage in mundane conversation on politics as an example.