Erik Schmidt and Sergey Brin are all part of the surveillance state and war machine. They will soon be awarded Nobel Prizes like the war criminal Henry Kissinger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial_of_Henry_Kissinger

https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/emails-give-...

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/6/nsa-chief-goo...

The book was pretty thorough, but not thorough enough. It failed to cover how much he intervened in US politics to cover for, enable, and protect a military dictatorship that was carrying out a massive political cleansing in Argentina, in which over 30,000 people were "disappeared". He's about as evil as they come.

Not really that hard to believe, considering where the "don't be evil" company got part of its initial funding from [0] and what these funding outfits have been up to themselves since then [1].

[0] https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-ci...

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/the-n...

Weaponizing AI on the face of it seems completely insane. The problem is that if we don’t, then we would presumably be at a tremendous strategic disadvantage to an adversary which did (more or less the logic that led to the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons).

I can’t see how militarized forms of AI don’t emerge as a consequence of significant progress in non-military AI, so perhaps all roads do eventually lead to SkyNet.

Great. Another reference to Skynet as the inevitable outcome of advancing automation. Despite all the facts to the contrary.

Will technology, including AI, inevitability be used to improve weaponry? Yes. Will AI inevitably lead to Skynet and Terminator robots? Hardly.

Today we can't build a self-driving car with more than level 2 autonomy, nor do honest experts believe one will happen soon. Today's autonomous mobile robots are incapable of even the most rudimentary human motions, and likewise, human-level robots are invisible on any 50 year time horizon, commercially or militarily. No AI-based tech has shown even the faintest sign of the level of AGI capabilities needed to control a robot army. Nor has any AI shown the potential for an emergent executive function or a desire to KILL ALL HUMANS.

To assume that present-day AI will likely self-assemble into a rebel robot army intent on destroying humanity… Why does anybody take this crap seriously? Or soberly reference it while hoping to be taken seriously?

It's time for all adults everywhere to stop imagining that pop scifi movies are a sensible foundation toward discussing how new tech can best serve its intended purpose. Scifi is meant to entertain, not inform. Given what we know today about AI, Skynet doesn't have a hope in hell in happening — not in terms of platform mobility nor in terms of cognition nor in terms of self-assembly. So PLEASE give all references to Skynet a rest.

Er, I was being glib.

Terminator style robots would be a pretty inefficient way to wipe out humanity.

Wrt motive, I would assume that if we are someday killed off by our own machines, it will most likely be something akin to an accidental nuclear holocaust.

>more or less the logic that led to the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons

Sure. One country threw a ton of resources into a program, and as a result the technology spread to numerous other countries leading to something like seven countries capable of destroying the world.

Maybe the end result is inevitable. Racing towards it so we can kill others before they can kill us isn't smart.

Obviously, it’s a terrible idea! Unfortunately, every nation or deeply resourced actor exercising complete restraint forever is probably not a Nash Equillibrium.

Did we ever have any reason to believe that slogan?

Kissinger is evil and schmidt has committed much evil. They are well suited

I've let this account for probably longer than we should've, but trollish usernames are not allowed on HN (https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...) and you clearly crossed the line here. I've banned the account.

In principle we'd be happy to rename it for you, but you've also been posting a lot of comments that go against the site guidelines, so we'd need some reason to believe that the account would also behave differently under a different name.

Says they guy whose username is an Eek-A-Mouse lyric about Ganja Smuggling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b21zIF3lAZo

https://www.google.com/search?q=Eek+A+Mouse+lyrics

    [...]
    Me an me girl name Jane

    Dang dang
    Didi bong gong
    Gidi bong gong
    Gidi men
    Bena bena bohoi
    Spen dem dem
    Gena men
    Bong gong
    Gidi bong gong
    Gidi bong gong
    Gidi ben
    Bena bena bohoi
    Gen gen
    Gena men-den

    Down dere in the ghetto I go, where tribulation I once know
    Mummy an daddy, all a' we so poor,
    We all had to sleep on the floor
    Storm it come and it blow down me door,
    Me ha fi nail up me window
    Me shoes tear up, me toe just a show,
    Me nuh know a where fi really wan' go
    Mama tell me "nah rob drug store,
    Police beat yuh, mek yu back sore"

    Dang dang
    Didi dang dang
    Gidi bang gang
    Gidi men
    Bena bohoi
    Bene bi deberen ehya