Does anyone have any idea what the DoD could possibly want from OpenAI? Less accurate/more sycophantic missiles?
2. Aide tells subordinate to write report.
3. Subordinate uses ChatGPT to write the 100-page report. Sends it to aide.
4. Aide uses ChatGPT to summarize report. Sends summary to SecDef.
5. SecDef accidentally posts summary on publicly-accessible social media page, then forwards to President.
6. Bombs go boom.
"We did our best, but sometimes these tools get it wrong." -politician after achieving their goal
One main function is to enable sloppier targeting while easing the PTSD load on soldiers, i.e. allowing for more criminal and genocidal operations without immediate mutiny or desertions.
In a sense you can make the computer more convincing to the operator and have it tag more people as supposedly threatening, e.g. to up the amount of supposed threats in a gathering from one actually militant person to several based on aggregation of sentiment analysis, network analysis and so on.
You might understand that you're looking at a wedding, but the computer says several people there are 'red' because of social media posts, who they had lunch with a while ago and so on, raising the threshold for when so called collateral starts to hurt your operators badly enough to be a problem.
And then you have the dream of autonomous swarms of machines doing murder, which I'm sure the current US regime is salivating over and likely hope that these corporations will be able to help bring about eventually. Imagine going from a cop street murder that gets bad press and court proceedings and so on, to instead having to handle a set of Jira tickets due to a supposed bug.
https://www.icrc.org/en/document/rules-war-why-they-matter#:...
Translated - they'll hand out GPT access to a bunch of service members and administrators. Except the UI will have a big DoD logo and words like "SECURE" and "CLASSIFIED" will be displayed on it a few dozen times.
“Under this award, the performer will develop prototype frontier AI capabilities to address critical national security challenges in both warfighting and enterprise domains,” the Defense Department said.
One AI per person
One voice. One vision. One AI - for you.
> The National Security Agency (NSA) is an intelligence agency of the United States Department of Defense, under the authority of the director of national intelligence (DNI).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency
> William J. Hartman is a United States Army lieutenant general who has served as the acting commander of United States Cyber Command, director of the National Security Agency,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Hartman
They’re staffed by military people (alongside civilians) and their commander is always military — because much of what they do (abroad) could be construed as acts of war.
Maybe one potential use could be to drink from the firehose of data and then try to create summary bullet-point reports for the higher ups instead of relying on data filtering up the chain of command in the old game of telephone. At least that is what I would use if for. Getting that data in nearly real-time in an accurate presentation would be priceless.
I do not have the slightest idea how they will secure all this data if going to a 3rd party like OpenAI unless they have their own self hosted version of it on their own mainframes. If that data is going to live in a 3rd party they need to secure their systems in a magical way systems has never been secured. They would have to cast some seriously powerful protection spells.