> Modern defenses cannot stop dedicated offensive teams and now those abilities can be automated and scaled. This could be launched by your neighbor.
That's already been true for years (aside from my neighbors being able to do it at an effective scale), no AI is needed. And AI wouldn't make it easier for my neighbors to develop this sort of machinery. So, in my view, that problem is orthogonal to AI.
> Anyone with access to a metalshop and electric motors will be able to produce terminator-like killing machines.
I don't think the thing that makes it difficult for my neighbor to build an effective autonomous killing machine is AI. You could build a very effective one using basic heuristics. The limitation is about actually building the machinery. So I don't think AI is a game-changer here, either. Also, you're implying AGI here -- which is something that doesn't exist, and is very unlikely to exist anytime soon.
> guns that don't miss, missiles that ignore flares and chaff, and point defenses that shoot incoming projectiles out of the sky, and use it to steamroll much larger powers.
Also something that can be done right now, outside of being completely infallible. AI won't bring infallibility with it, so I'm not seeing how that changes anything.
But here, you're no longer talking about individual action anyway, so it's a bit off-topic. You're talking about governmental or corporate action.
> Not to mention the power of persuasive communication itself.
Yep, current systems are clearly amplifiers of this.
But even if you're 100% right in your predictions, none of those things are nearly as bad as everyone having their own nuke.
>That's already been true for years (aside from my neighbors being able to do it at an effective scale), no AI is needed. And AI wouldn't make it easier for my neighbors to develop this sort of machinery.
Scale matters. When your neighbor can just type in the prompt "Destroy as much critical infrastructure as possible", that is as destructive as nukes.
I feel like you're just being lazy and unimaginative. I'm not willing to stake the future of humanity on that.
> When your neighbor can just type in the prompt "Destroy as much critical infrastructure as possible", that is as destructive as nukes.
True. When that's even a remote possibility of being something that could be done, then I may change my opinion.
> I feel like you're just being lazy and unimaginative.
Have I made you angry or something here?
I can imagine all of these sorts of doomsday scenarios right along with you. But, unless there's some sort of indication that they're anything but fantasy, it seems unwise to form opinions about reality on them.
That's already been true for years (aside from my neighbors being able to do it at an effective scale), no AI is needed. And AI wouldn't make it easier for my neighbors to develop this sort of machinery. So, in my view, that problem is orthogonal to AI.
> Anyone with access to a metalshop and electric motors will be able to produce terminator-like killing machines.
I don't think the thing that makes it difficult for my neighbor to build an effective autonomous killing machine is AI. You could build a very effective one using basic heuristics. The limitation is about actually building the machinery. So I don't think AI is a game-changer here, either. Also, you're implying AGI here -- which is something that doesn't exist, and is very unlikely to exist anytime soon.
> guns that don't miss, missiles that ignore flares and chaff, and point defenses that shoot incoming projectiles out of the sky, and use it to steamroll much larger powers.
Also something that can be done right now, outside of being completely infallible. AI won't bring infallibility with it, so I'm not seeing how that changes anything.
But here, you're no longer talking about individual action anyway, so it's a bit off-topic. You're talking about governmental or corporate action.
> Not to mention the power of persuasive communication itself.
Yep, current systems are clearly amplifiers of this.
But even if you're 100% right in your predictions, none of those things are nearly as bad as everyone having their own nuke.