News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by Xelbair on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:09AM (#43023794)
i mean.. you need power to enforce your values. and UK hasn't been in power for a long time.

"If you are not capable of violence, you are not peaceful. You are harmless"

Unless you can stand on equal field - either by alliance, or by your own power - you aren't a negotiating partner, and i say that as European.

Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by wobfan on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:44AM (#43024002)
> "If you are not capable of violence, you are not peaceful. You are harmless"

this is exactly the value that caused so much war and death all over the world, for decades and thousands of years. still, even in 2025, it's being followed. are we doomed, chat?

Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by jddj on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:53AM (#43024052)
There are peaceful strategies that are temporarily stable in the face of actors who capitalise on peaceful actors to take their resources, but they usually (always?) take the form of quickly moving on when an aggressor arrives.

Eg. birds abandoning rather than defending a perch when another approaches.

We're typically not happy to do that, though you can see it happening in some parts of the world right now.

Some kind of enlightened state where violent competition for resources (incl. status & power) no longer makes sense is imaginable, but seems a long way off.

Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by Yoric on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @06:03AM (#43024118)
Just to clarify, who's the aggressor in what you write? The US?
Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by jddj on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @06:10AM (#43024168)
No one in particular. Russia would be one current example, Israel (and others in the region at various times) another, the US and Germany historically, the Romans, the Ottomans, China, Japan, Britain, Spain, warlords in the western sahara, the kid at school who wanted the other kids' lunch money.

The idea though is that if everyone suddenly disarmed overnight it would be so highly advantageous to a deviant aggressor that one would assuredly emerge.

Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by pjc50 on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:51AM (#43024040)
US sending clear signals to countries that they should start thinking about their own nuclear proliferation, even if that means treaty-breaking.
Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by GlacierFox on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:53AM (#43024051)
The emphasis is the word capable here. I think there's a difference between a country using their capability of violence to actually be violent and a one with the tangible capability using it for peace.
Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by numpad0 on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @06:09AM (#43024159)
Yes and we don't know if the US is on the blue side this time. It's scary.
Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by Xelbair on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @02:07PM (#43028584)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

yes.

i would also recommend The Prince as light reading to better understand how the world works.

Re:US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit by tim333 on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @06:40PM (#43031002)
I think peace is more down to the good/peaceful guys being better armed than the bad ones.