These achievements are a testament to the sad reality that military interests are often the first to take advantage of wondrous advancements such as AI, just as nuclear physics and other technologies were hijacked for more efficient methods of killing.
Stephen Hawking pointed this out during an interview on the Larry King show.
The AI fighter jet pilot, known as Alpha, was developed by researchers from the University of Cincinnati and defense company Psibernetix. It used four virtual jets to defend a coastline from two attacking planes with superior weapons systems—without suffering any losses."Governments seem to be engaged in an AI arms race, designing planes and weapons with intelligent technologies. The funding for projects directly beneficial to the human race, such as improved medical screening seems a somewhat lower priority."
Retired US Air Force colonel Gene Lee was shot out of the air every time after protracted engagements, and could not even manage to score a hit on Alpha.
The groundbreaking feat was accomplished through the use of "fuzzy logic" to efficiently compute the massive amounts of data from a simulated fighter jet. Instead of analyzing every bit of data equally, fuzzy logic assigns a degree of truth or significance to the pieces of data before making a broader decision.
For now, the talk is about using Alpha "as a simulation tool or as a device to help develop better systems for assisting human pilots in the air." But it's a safe assumption that using AI to pilot real machines is being explored by a military machine incessantly hungry for the next best means of reaping death and destruction."Here, you've got an AI system that seems to be able to deal with the air-to-air environment, which is extraordinarily dynamic, has an extraordinary number of parameters and, in the paper, more than holds its own against a skilled and capable, experienced combat pilot," said Doug Barrie, a military aerospace analyst at think tank IISS.
"It's like a chess master losing out to a computer."
If an AI fighter pilot were ever to fly an actual fighter jet, the obvious question is, what happens when it decides to attack a non-military target? Of course, human pilots routinely bomb innocent civilians, but this is "justified" as collateral damage in the pursuit of defeating the bogeyman du jour.
The unmanned torpedo-launching sea vessel system, called Seagull, will soon be put into use by the Israeli Navy for use against submarines and sea mines. It consists of one or two surface vessels, each about 40 feet long, operated remotely from manned ships or the shore.
One vessel carries a sonar system that can search the entire water volume, with another that deploys an underwater robot for further investigation. When a threat is confirmed, a vessel launches a torpedo-like weapon to destroy the target.
This test carried out in the Haifa port marks the first time that a torpedo has been launched from an unmanned boat.
While it's great to "take the man out of the minefield," the Seagull also represents the kind of military advancement we see with unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones."The success of the first torpedo launch test is a major milestone, confirming the Unmanned Surface Vessel's capability to incorporate weapons that counter submarines, in addition to its unique submarine and mine detection capabilities,' Elbit, the firm behind the trial said."
As we know, drones have been the tool of choice for expanding undeclared war into countries in the name of fighting terrorism, which has resulted in thousands of innocent civilians being killed. When bombing is carried out remotely, from the comfort of a padded seat in a secure building, the operator is that much more detached from the reality of killing people.
Former drone operators have gone public about the blood lust and indifference that characterizes the drone assassination program, and fellow operators getting intoxicated to "bend that reality and try to picture yourself not being there."
Of course, operating torpedo-equipped sea vessels is a different beast, but the trend toward unmanned killing machines is nonetheless troubling. With AI being brought into military technology, how long before scenes from the Terminator movies are a real thing?
Reader Comments
You should probably explain that term to the general public, because there are but a few of us that have read those books.
For anyone intelligent enough can give these AI planes a fake target then destroy the fukkers.
Terminator type-AI is a long, long way off if it's even possible. Machines can do very well with specific tasks they are programmed for. The move toward abstraction and applying learned lessons to other areas, dealing with the unknown and unscheduled events (i.e. life), is such a mind-boggling gargantuan task no one has even been able to come up with how to code this even in THEORY. There best anyone can do is write billions of lines of code telling the machine what to do under specific circumstances. There is no improvisation, there is no understanding.
And NO, it's not a processing power limitation, and never has been. The idea that machines can break away from their code is founded in ignorance about how machines actually work and ignorance that what gives us these abilities is our spiritual nature.
The fact that a chatbot passed the turing test is not indicative of a breakthrough in AI, it's indicative of low intelligence judges. Tripping up AI is incredibly easy when you understand exactly how these programs work.
I just see things differently.
Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking, considered among some of the most intelligent minds of our generation are warning the world of the same thing.
Also its quite ignorant to think that just because public knowledge of programing is years away from achieving such goals, that there isn’t any clandestine research be it private or government, that is way beyond anything the public knows about. You will find out how advanced this science is when it is too late. After all AI is like a Pandora’s box. Once opened it cannot be put back.
Let those who have eyes to see, let them see, and for those who have ears to hear, let them hear.
Society is wrong in thinking that only money, power, ambition, and material success makes one intelligent. This is an indicator of above-average intelligence, yes, but some VERY intelligent folks have no desire to be worshiped like these egomaniacs. Of course this materialist worshiping society will never regard their opinions, these "nobodies." I can't wait for an enlightened society.
They are also atheist/claim there is nothing to psi. Psi has been proven way beyond a reasonable doubt with studies spanning decades. At the very least, that tells me they don't follow actual science that they claim is their god. Like everyone else, they don't look beyond the surface/what the general population believe. To me, one cannot be a true intellectual without having an understanding of the world around them on fundamental levels. To me, this is possibly the root of the AI fallacy -- not understanding what intelligence is in the first place.
I have a lot of experience in AI programming. I'm well versed in fuzzy logic, neural nets, genetic algorithms, etc.
So my challenge again, how would actual take-over-the-world AI work, even in THEORY? This world is collapsing in every way imaginable, and people are fearing AI -- something no one can even dream up a working model for so far?!
Can you show even one example of a system doing something it's not programmed to do? I
The real danger to the world from "AI" is improperly coded/buggy AI software, like the AI in this article. There's no real technological breakthrough here, this tech has been possible for decades, but there is a dramatic increase in danger due to bugs.
Did Haweywood already tell us this was coming?
But it is is representive of the attitudes that exist.
We must win the next war. Necessarily., to defend our failing economic regime. Manufacturing now lives in external states, thanks to their lower labour rates. Specifically China, although our own multi-naitional companies have dumped local employment, in favour of cheaper manufacturing..
Which clearly makes China evil. Not our own multi-nationals, that have rejected their own roots. All in the name of glorious profits. No, not at all.