What is more difficult, building a military missile or the software that runs it? If they are already building weapons, not sure the software to run them was the impediment.

Presumably, the world used dumb munitions without any software for a long time.

▲

itsdesmond 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s the software. Definitely. We been making bombs for a while now. They used to toss them out the side of biplanes. Oddly, your second paragraph immediately undermines the first.

> Presumably, the world used dumb munitions without any software for a long time.

What do you think “presumably” is accomplishing here? Are you unsure, but willing to assume for purpose of the discussion, that bombs preceded computers?

	▲	jjk166 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Did those dumb bombs tossed out of biplanes lack software because the software was difficult to write or because there was no hardware in the world capable of running software? Given that missile guidance systems predate the very notion of software, and the moment better hardware exists there is software ready to take advantage of it, methinks software was not the hard part.
	▲	piloto_ciego 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I promise you, the software is not the hard part.
	▲	Gud 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		We've been making PID loops for a lot longer.

▲

quikoa 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> What is more difficult, building a military missile or the software that runs it?

"If software was easier compared to building the a missile then Anthropic is in the clear or something." Is that the line of reasoning to protect Anthropic from any wrongdoing?

▲

vdomi 4 hours ago | parent [-]

As much as I "hate" Anthropic, it did nothing wrong here. They could have used any closed or open model anyway

	▲	quikoa an hour ago \| parent [-]
		"Others do it too" is not really a counterargument when Anthropic should've stopped this. They are yelling "AI is dangerous" the loudest so the least they can do is get their own monitoring in order.