You seem to have missed the point, which is that the decision to murder a large number of innocent people was made by humans at the top of the chain of command, and 'AI' is being used as a thin pretext for that.

The pattern matches various other acts of senseless violence against innocents in South America.

The message isn't "We did this accidentally. We should understand how it happened, so we can make sure it doesn't happen again.".

It's "We do this to make the point that we can, no one can stop us, and if we're challenged we're going to lie about it."

▲

roenxi 21 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It's "We do this to make the point that we can, no one can stop us, and if we're challenged we're going to lie about it."

FWIW, forcing people to go along with transparent lies is a popular social manoeuvre. It signals both the power of a group and the power of the person leading the lie.

Although it is a very frustrating tendency, because honesty and realism tends to be better for the people who have the numbers. It is hard to organise real efforts around lies.

▲

geraneum 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The decision was indeed made by AI and humans failed in their duty to fucking verify it. They green lit and now we have school children dead. No single component of this whole chain is defensible.

▲

lifeformed 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Depends on what "decision" means. If I say, "Claude, compile a list of 1000 buildings to blow up," and then skim the output briefly and then press the red button, I wouldn't say Claude "decided" anything.

▲

geraneum 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Of course it did! Among hundreds of thousands it decided those 1000 are the ones to blow up! No matter how we twist the meaning of “decision”.

▲

archonis 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If someone made a table of one hundred potential targets and rolled ten ten sided dice to pick a row to target, do we blame the decision on the dice, the table, Wizards of the Coast, or the person who decided this was a good way to choose targets?

	▲	geraneum 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You’re conflating who chooses the decision maker with the decision making device. So AI’s output is not so different than a roll of dice? Definitely the people who decided to put in such an incapable and unreliable tool should be held accountable. No dispute in that.

▲

edoceo 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Who decided to bomb places? AI? Who decided to pick a fight? AI?

▲

ajsnigrutin 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

We had a public tender for some 3d model of a railroad project a few years ago, three companies applied and for some reason (corruption) the most expensive one was selected to make the model.

They blamed excel for the bad choice. Excel.

I mean sure, you can always blame the tool, i can blame my cars rear parking sensors when i hit someone when backing up during parking, but come on... at some point, a human is responsible. Someone, some person, decided and greenlit the decision to bomb those places and should now be in jail for that.

I mean, what's next? A building collapses, because the load bearing sections are too weak... do we blame CAD tools now?

▲

geraneum 14 hours ago | parent [-]

Non of the example you’ve falsely equivocated have the word “intelligent“ in them though, do they?

▲

joquarky 13 hours ago | parent [-]

Just keep moving those goalposts while ignoring your cognitive dissonance that seems to reject the fact that humans are ultimately responsible.

▲

geraneum 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Ah you must be one of those "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

	▲	ajsnigrutin 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Great example, if someone is killed by gunfire, does the gun go to jail or does the shooter (a person) take responsibility?

▲

GoblinSlayer 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Then you suddenly realize you outsourced your thinking to Claude, because it's tiresome to think by yourself.

	▲	1718627440 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The decision to blow up 1000 buildings, without any background check wasn't done by claude.

▲

sillyfluke 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You should have just kept the last two sentences.

>The decision was indeed made by AI and humans failed in their duty to fucking verify it.

The decision to leave the decision to AI was made by humans. It's on the moronic humans for not understanding the limitations and flaws of the software they are using and believing the marketing material without constantly verifying their results.

How good or bad the software is an almost equally important but separate issue.

	▲	geraneum 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The decision to leave the decision to AI The decision, to make the decision to leave the decision… So much mental gymnastics.