# A Dogfight Renews Concerns About AI's Lethal Potential



## 2JoshH

Alphabet's DeepMind pioneered reinforcement learning.
A California company used it to create an algorithm that defeated an F-16 pilot in a simulation.

An aircraft controlled by an algorithm can operate with speed and precision that exceeds even the most elite top-gun pilot.

Last week, a technique popularized by DeepMind was adapted to control an autonomous F-16 fighter plane in a Pentagon-funded contest to show off the capabilities of AI systems. In the final stage of the event, a similar algorithm went head-to-head with a real F-16 pilot using a VR headset and simulator controls. The AI pilot won, 5-0.
https://www.wired.com/story/dogfigh..._medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=list1_p4


----------



## tohunt4me

2JoshH said:


> Alphabet's DeepMind pioneered reinforcement learning.
> A California company used it to create an algorithm that defeated an F-16 pilot in a simulation.
> 
> An aircraft controlled by an algorithm can operate with speed and precision that exceeds even the most elite top-gun pilot.
> 
> Last week, a technique popularized by DeepMind was adapted to control an autonomous F-16 fighter plane in a Pentagon-funded contest to show off the capabilities of AI systems. In the final stage of the event, a similar algorithm went head-to-head with a real F-16 pilot using a VR headset and simulator controls. The AI pilot won, 5-0.
> https://www.wired.com/story/dogfigh..._medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=list1_p4


Robots dont take an Oath to Uphold the Constitution.

Do you want a slave army that has no conscience and that can be controlled by EVIL ?

 . . . .FREE WILL


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

tohunt4me said:


> Robots dont take an Oath to Uphold the Constitution.
> 
> Do you want a slave army that has no conscience and that can be controlled by EVIL ?
> 
> . . . .FREE WILL
> View attachment 502319


Imagine Donald trump Mobilizing the Army National Guard to put down a protest in your city.

What's that? One of the protesters committed arson by throwing a molotov cocktail?, that makes it violent Felony time to switch between rubber bullets to Hollow points.


----------



## tohunt4me

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Imagine Donald trump Mobilizing the Army National Guard to put down a protest in your city.
> 
> What's that? One of the protesters committed arson by throwing a molotov cocktail?, that makes it violent Felony time to switch between rubber bullets to Hollow points.


Easier to imagine ERIC HOLDER Employing Robot Army under Obama.

Just like his Illegal False Flag Gun Running to Mexico in an Effort to Steal Americans Right to Own Guns.

After Obama signed that Illegal United Nations Treaty on Small Arms.

Treason.

The Democratic party of Lies & Subvesrion.
Easier to imagine the wrongs there.

America does not need Subversive manipulation.
( A.K.A.- Nudge Initiative)


----------



## SleelWheels

Bring it.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

There's a book written by a dolphin trainer called "Don't Shoot the Dog."

The point she makes is that if you have an animal (or person--it's actually a great book btw and if you're interested in the psychology of training, very useful) doing something you don't want them to do, the fastest and most effective way to instantly stop that behavior is to shoot them--but maybe that's not the best choice 99.9% of the time.

For a robot who is tasked with fixing a problem maybe it would be. 

Can we teach an AI empathy or morality? Or just allow them to learn the "best" way to fix a problem.

Shoot all the police there'll be no police brutality. 

Shoot all the protestors/rioters/looters there'll be none of that either.

Wouldn't it just be easier to shoot all people?


----------



## UberBastid

I read an article about a year ago in some tech mag while waiting for my doc (why is there a tech mag in my doc's office?).
Anyway ... it was talking about drones. There is an air force base in So Cal where kids play computer games ... but its actually drones flying over the middle east. Recon and occasionally attack - they are armed.
Then it went on to say that there is a next generation that is actually out, but not being used. They don't need a pilot. They're completely autonomous. They make the decision whether the person they see is friend or foe, and can be programmed to kill anyone they determine to be foe.
How's that sound? A machine deciding whether you should live or die.

All that is needed is to define what is foe. Is it ... someone with dark skin? Someone wearing a MAGA hat? Someone wearing a Burka?


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

UberBastid said:


> I read an article about a year ago in some tech mag while waiting for my doc (why is there a tech mag in my doc's office?).
> Anyway ... it was talking about drones. There is an air force base in So Cal where kids play computer games ... but its actually drones flying over the middle east. Recon and occasionally attack - they are armed.
> Then it went on to say that there is a next generation that is actually out, but not being used. They don't need a pilot. They're completely autonomous. They make the decision whether the person they see is friend or foe, and can be programmed to kill anyone they determine to be foe.
> How's that sound? A machine deciding whether you should live or die.
> 
> All that is needed is to define what is foe. Is it ... someone with dark skin? Someone wearing a MAGA hat? Someone wearing a Burka?












Our troops are unarmed and being overrun, initiate sniper drone strike now for all non US personnel in a 50 ft perimeter of these defenseless soldiers...


----------



## ANT 7

Meh.

The AI aircraft continually did head on attacks, which are something aviators are not trained to do, nor os it a recommended method of ACM protocol.


----------



## UberBastid

ANT 7 said:


> Meh.
> 
> The AI aircraft continually did head on attacks, which are something aviators are not trained to do, nor os it a recommended method of ACM protocol.


Today, yea.


----------



## June132017

Erich Hartmann was the biggest badazz on the planet. He definitely was one of the best dog fighters of all time. He painted a black tulip on his plane and all the soviets would fly away if they had seen it. Then he was like "screw this" and removed that logo from his plane. In 2 months after that he claimed 50 aerial kills. 

I think in one day he had 10 P-39 aerial kills. He would get right up from behind them and blast them at close range. They didn't know what hit them alot of times. 

He did get shot down a few times so it wasn't all success.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

2JoshH said:


> Alphabet's DeepMind pioneered reinforcement learning.
> A California company used it to create an algorithm that defeated an F-16 pilot in a simulation.
> 
> An aircraft controlled by an algorithm can operate with speed and precision that exceeds even the most elite top-gun pilot.
> 
> Last week, a technique popularized by DeepMind was adapted to control an autonomous F-16 fighter plane in a Pentagon-funded contest to show off the capabilities of AI systems. In the final stage of the event, a similar algorithm went head-to-head with a real F-16 pilot using a VR headset and simulator controls. The AI pilot won, 5-0.
> https://www.wired.com/story/dogfigh..._medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=list1_p4


The computer has a massive advantage in a VR video game(simulation).

Plugging the computer into a fighter and expecting repeat results in real life is laughable.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> There's a book written by a dolphin trainer called "Don't Shoot the Dog."
> 
> The point she makes is that if you have an animal (or person--it's actually a great book btw and if you're interested in the psychology of training, very useful) doing something you don't want them to do, the fastest and most effective way to instantly stop that behavior is to shoot them--but maybe that's not the best choice 99.9% of the time.
> 
> For a robot who is tasked with fixing a problem maybe it would be.
> 
> Can we teach an AI empathy or morality? Or just allow them to learn the "best" way to fix a problem.
> 
> Shoot all the police there'll be no police brutality.
> 
> Shoot all the protestors/rioters/looters there'll be none of that either.
> 
> Wouldn't it just be easier to shoot all people?


The problem with this analogy is that the dog can't shoot back.

People shoot back and a militant robot can shoot back. That's actually the easiest path to dramatic escalation.


----------



## UberBastid

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> The computer has a massive advantage in a VR video game(simulation).
> 
> Plugging the computer into a fighter and expecting repeat results in real life is laughable.


Yea, today.
Next year?
Ten years?

Think we're not working on it?
Think China is?


----------



## tohunt4me

UberBastid said:


> Yea, today.
> Next year?
> Ten years?
> 
> Think we're not working on it?
> Think China is?


There is An Algorithm to recognize your " Gait"
The way you walk from over a mile away.
Facial Recognition is Not your only identifier.

Been around for over 10 years.

Want to Hide from A.I. ?

Put a pebble in your shoe . . .

( you are being sewn up in a World Govt. Bag)
ID4D























( touch screens are reading your Fingerprints daily . . . Without your permission)


----------



## UberBastid

Yeow ... "unobtrusive, in that it requires no subject contact"


----------



## tohunt4me

Look.

Time for You to LEARN

WHO YOUR REAL MASTER IS !

* FREE WILL.









THE WORLD BANK
IS YOUR GOVERNMENT.



UberBastid said:


> Yeow ... "unobtrusive, in that it requires no subject contact"


Drones have had it for over a decade.
Ask Jihad Johnny . . . 
Oops . . . they had to use D.N.A. from Pieces . . .

Just who did people THINK was FORCING us to get " REALD I.D." to fly?
To take a bus ?

WORLD BANK .

Thank your Federal Debt for answering to them.

We are not FREE.
we are not SOVEREIGN !
WE ARE NOT ECONOMICALLY SOLVABLE !

and it WILL get worse !

The Blue Helmets

Will march in

& " Reorganize" America soon.

World Bank Collection Agency.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

UberBastid said:


> Yea, today.
> Next year?
> Ten years?
> 
> Think we're not working on it?
> Think China is?


Yea we are working on it and they are working on it because they can't afford not to be for when it finally works or other innovations that might spun from the research.

However driverless cars will precede autonomous planes especially those used for warcraft.

Autonomous cars are a cake walk compared to aircraft because so much more could go wrong that means total destruction.

Once fully autonomous cars become real, fully autonomous planes will still be decades behind.


----------



## tohunt4me

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Yea we are working on it and they are working on it because they can't afford not to be for when it finally works or other innovations that might spun from the research.
> 
> However driverless cars will precede autonomous planes especially those used for warcraft.
> 
> Autonomous cars are a cake walk compared to aircraft because so much more could go wrong that means total destruction.
> 
> Once fully autonomous cars become real, fully autonomous planes will still be decades behind.


They have autonomous drones flying around weaponized now.

Over 10 years.

They can identify Targets in a stadium.

This has been published and non classified for over a Decade.

There is much more.

So much more.









A little GOOGLE D.A.R.P.A. project announced in 2015.

Dont Forget

Google D.A.R.P.A. knows your habits.
When you go to bed.
When you sleep.
Everyone you know.
Everywhere you go.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

tohunt4me said:


> They have autonomous drones flying around weaponized now.
> 
> Over 10 years.
> 
> They can identify Targets in a stadium.
> 
> This has been published and non classified for over a Decade.
> 
> There is much more.
> 
> So much more.
> View attachment 503408
> 
> 
> A little GOOGLE D.A.R.P.A. project announced in 2015.


No they don't. Many including some writers confuse unmanned drones with autonomous drones.

What is being seen is drones being controlled from a remote location. Autonomous drones are still early in the research and development stage.


----------



## tohunt4me

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> No they don't. Many including some writers confuse unmanned drones with autonomous drones.
> 
> What is being seen is drones being controlled from a remote location. Autonomous drones are still early in the research and development stage.


Uh Huh.

And black delta planes that travel straight up at thousands of M.P.H. are U.F.O.'s.

Not Military.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

tohunt4me said:


> Uh Huh.
> 
> And black delta planes that travel straight up at thousands of M.P.H. are U.F.O.'s.
> 
> Not Military.


Once again the drones are controlled from remote military locations they are not autonomous.

The drones you see are directly under human control.

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/ar...y-drones-no-longer-science-fiction/index.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_combat_aerial_vehicle


----------



## tohunt4me

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Once again the drones are controlled from remote military locations they are not autonomous.
> 
> The drones you see are directly under human control.
> 
> https://www.nato.int/docu/review/ar...y-drones-no-longer-science-fiction/index.html
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_combat_aerial_vehicle


Yes.
Thermal image signature of target located . . .
Take out ?
Yes . . .no .
Human presses the permission button.

( Eliminate with Extreme Prejudice).


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

tohunt4me said:


> Yes.
> Thermal image signature of target located . . .
> Take out ?
> Yes . . .no .
> Human presses the permission button.


No human remote controls drone throughout. The drones I repeat are not autonomous.

Writers are using the word "autonomous" incorrectly. The drones are Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles UAVs.


----------



## ANT 7

June132017 said:


> Erich Hartmann was the biggest badazz on the planet. He definitely was one of the best dog fighters of all time. He painted a black tulip on his plane and all the soviets would fly away if they had seen it. Then he was like "screw this" and removed that logo from his plane. In 2 months after that he claimed 50 aerial kills.
> 
> I think in one day he had 10 P-39 aerial kills. He would get right up from behind them and blast them at close range. They didn't know what hit them alot of times.
> 
> He did get shot down a few times so it wasn't all success.


He scored 352 kills in WWII.......I've read his autobiography.

A fascinating man to say the least. I visited his grave in 2010.


----------



## tohunt4me

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> No human remote controls drone throughout. The drones I repeat are not autonomous.
> 
> Writers are using the word "autonomous" incorrectly. The drones are Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles UAVs.


Flying grid patterns searching for targets is tedious & monotonous.

Autonomous with Alert to Human standby for verification.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

tohunt4me said:


> Flying grid patterns searching for targets is tedious & monotonous.
> 
> Autonomous with Alert to Human standby for verification.


Okay post proof of an autonomous drone.

Remember I just posted proof directly from Nato none currently exist but they are being developed.

Ball is in your court


----------



## tohunt4me

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Okay post proof of an autonomous drone.
> 
> Remember I just posted proof directly from Nato none currently exist but they are being developed.
> 
> Ball is in your court


I built Navy Ships for years. . .
And i Never talk about what is on them.

Information published is all i will post.
And only on projects i was never personally involved with.

Human permission is required to initiate.

I Say Autonomous Drones Exist.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

tohunt4me said:


> I built Navy Ships for years. . .
> And i Never talk about what is on them.
> 
> Information published is all i will post.
> And only on projects i was never personally involved with.
> 
> Human permission is required to initiate.
> 
> I Say Autonomous Drones Exist.


Will not debate you further. Honestly I still have my doubts about are they full autonomous but I do understand the military will not publish their latest and greatest war tech.

Thank you for sharing what you legally could.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

UberBastid said:


> I read an article about a year ago in some tech mag while waiting for my doc (why is there a tech mag in my doc's office?).
> Anyway ... it was talking about drones. There is an air force base in So Cal where kids play computer games ... but its actually drones flying over the middle east. Recon and occasionally attack - they are armed.
> Then it went on to say that there is a next generation that is actually out, but not being used. They don't need a pilot. They're completely autonomous. They make the decision whether the person they see is friend or foe, and can be programmed to kill anyone they determine to be foe.
> How's that sound? A machine deciding whether you should live or die.
> 
> All that is needed is to define what is foe. Is it ... someone with dark skin? Someone wearing a MAGA hat? Someone wearing a Burka?


Definitely MAGA hat...or orange skin.



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Our troops are unarmed and being overrun, initiate sniper drone strike now for all non US personnel in a 50 ft perimeter of these defenseless soldiers...


How does that kid manage to play in those shoes?


----------



## CarpeNoctem

I remember reading an article from years ago about autonomous drones that loiter over areas for days without any human interaction. If you think about it, it is not much different that auto-pilot.


----------



## Trafficat

tohunt4me said:


> Google D.A.R.P.A. knows your habits.
> When you go to bed.
> When you sleep.
> Everyone you know.
> Everywhere you go.


Even I couldn't explain to someone how my rotating sleep schedule works. As nearly as I can tell, I sleep at random times. But maybe Google knows the pattern!


----------



## CarpeNoctem

Trafficat said:


> Even I couldn't explain to someone how my rotating sleep schedule works. As nearly as I can tell, I sleep at random times. But maybe Google knows the pattern!


If you have an electric smart meter the electric utility (which probably sells data or partners with google) can determine patterns in usage and could likely pick out times when you sleep. Maybe not find a 'pattern' per se.


----------



## Trafficat

CarpeNoctem said:


> If you have an electric smart meter the electric utility (which probably sells data or partners with google) can determine patterns in usage and could likely pick out times when you sleep. Maybe not find a 'pattern' per se.


Sounds like it would work if you slept at home in 8 hour stretches every night. If you have an 8 hour period of less power usage every night at the same time, it is a fair guess that it is a sleep time.

I usually sleep 30 minutes to 4 hours at a time, usually in my car and only rarely at home. When I am home, I occasionally spend hours doing things that do not require more electronics than I would use sleeping... like handloading ammunition. They could say, "He wasn't asleep at 8 because he used an appliance at 8." But if I didn't use an appliance from 9 to 1, there could be a lot of reasons. And the next day, I might not use an appliance at 8 because I slept at that time, and I might use an appliance at 10.

Easy to see when someone is not asleep due to spikes in usage, but not so easy to tell when someone is asleep if they only sleep small blocks with no real pattern.


----------



## CarpeNoctem

Trafficat said:


> Sounds like it would work if you slept at home in 8 hour stretches every night. If you have an 8 hour period of less power usage every night at the same time, it is a fair guess that it is a sleep time.
> 
> I usually sleep 30 minutes to 4 hours at a time, usually in my car and only rarely at home. When I am home, I occasionally spend hours doing things that do not require more electronics than I would use sleeping... like handloading ammunition. They could say, "He wasn't asleep at 8 because he used an appliance at 8." But if I didn't use an appliance from 9 to 1, there could be a lot of reasons. And the next day, I might not use an appliance at 8 because I slept at that time, and I might use an appliance at 10.
> 
> Easy to see when someone is not asleep due to spikes in usage, but not so easy to tell when someone is asleep if they only sleep small blocks with no real pattern.


Yeah, it would be difficult to find a pattern to us mortals. But the granularity on the smart meters and grid is to the point that they can almost tell which lights are on. Not because of fluorescent ballasts or similar (which are easy) but the slight differences in the same bulb types - like tell your workbench light from your bedside light. For them to be certain, they would have to know which bulbs are where but given time and times used, they could figure it out if they really wanted.

There was a company working on a tech that could tell a coffee maker from a blow dryer to a space heater. All use about the same amounts of power but they were detecting the harmonics emitted on the power line by the various heating and motor coils.

But this is getting deep into conspiracy and surveillance shtuff. Not sure why they would want to know when someone blow dries their hair but it just adds another layer to big brother...


----------



## tohunt4me

CarpeNoctem said:


> Yeah, it would be difficult to find a pattern to us mortals. But the granularity on the smart meters and grid is to the point that they can almost tell which lights are on. Not because of fluorescent ballasts or similar (which are easy) but the slight differences in the same bulb types - like tell your workbench light from your bedside light. For them to be certain, they would have to know which bulbs are where but given time and times used, they could figure it out if they really wanted.
> 
> There was a company working on a tech that could tell a coffee maker from a blow dryer to a space heater. All use about the same amounts of power but they were detecting the harmonics emitted on the power line by the various heating and motor coils.
> 
> But this is getting deep into conspiracy and surveillance shtuff. Not sure why they would want to know when someone blow dries their hair but it just adds another layer to big brother...


Every bulb in my house burns 6 watts.
L.E.D.( they claim " photos" can be taken with L.E.D. lights, smart t.v.' s can listen to you, etc.)
7 bulbs stay on 24/7 if i am home or not.


----------



## CarpeNoctem

tohunt4me said:


> Every bulb in my house burns 6 watts.
> L.E.D.( they claim " photos" can be taken with L.E.D. lights, smart t.v.' s can listen to you, etc.)
> 7 bulbs stay on 24/7 if i am home or not.


Not to beat a dead horse but due to quality control there is likely, at least, a few milliamps of differences between your led bulbs. I use them too in everything I can. I don't worry about them taking pictures as I think that is a bit far fetched. Maybe some spycraft stuff could have led bulbs taking pictures. Never know what Mitre may be working on these days...

There was a lawsuit a few years ago against Samsung because their TV's were listening to people. They admitted that the TV's could do it but I'm not sure how the lawsuit ended. Like siri and google and amazon echos and ... are always listening.


----------



## CarpeNoctem

On a related note, I saw on the news that the FAA had approved Amazon's testing of drone deliveries. I'm guessing they would be autonomous at some point in the future.


----------



## tohunt4me

CarpeNoctem said:


> On a related note, I saw on the news that the FAA had approved Amazon's testing of drone deliveries. I'm guessing they would be autonomous at some point in the future.


Last thing we need is the air filled with buzzing drones overhead !


----------



## CarpeNoctem

tohunt4me said:


> Last thing we need is the air filled with buzzing drones overhead !


Agreed. Plus there is no telling what secret data gathering features they will have.


----------

