this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024

329 points (85.2% liked)

Technology

59314 readers

4817 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

329

AI Launches Nukes In ‘Worrying’ War Simulation: ‘I Just Want to Have Peace in the World’ (www.vice.com)

submitted 9 months ago by MakunaHatata@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world

139 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Researchers say AI models like GPT4 are prone to “sudden” escalations as the U.S. military explores their use for warfare.

Researchers ran international conflict simulations with five different AIs and found that they tended to escalate war, sometimes out of nowhere, and even use nuclear weapons.
The AIs were large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, GPT 3.5, Claude 2.0, Llama-2-Chat, and GPT-4-Base, which are being explored by the U.S. military and defense contractors for decision-making.
The researchers invented fake countries with different military levels, concerns, and histories and asked the AIs to act as their leaders.
The AIs showed signs of sudden and hard-to-predict escalations, arms-race dynamics, and worrying justifications for violent actions.
The study casts doubt on the rush to deploy LLMs in the military and diplomatic domains, and calls for more research on their risks and limitations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] CeeBee@lemmy.world -17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

They didn't. They used LLMs.

Edit: to everyone saying that LLMs "are chat bots". I know it seems that way to the layperson and how it's often explain, but it's not true.

[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 25 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Which are chat bots.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

A chat bot can be an LLM, but an LLM is not inherently a chat bot.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What do you think large language model means? If you want desicion making, you should train a model on data relevant to said desicion making. ^

This is like being confused as to why a hammer does a shit job of driving screws.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

What do you think large language model means?

Not a chat bot, because that's not what they are. And saying so is both reductive and wholly incorrect.

If you want desicion making, you should train a model on data relevant to said desicion making.

Partly true. There's more to it than throwing domain specific data at the training set.

[–] forrgott@lemm.ee 17 points 9 months ago (2 children)

A glorified chatbot, in other words.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

In other words, you don't really really know what LLMs are.

[–] tabular@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

If one is feeling cynical; humans are chatbots in shoes.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Searle speaks frankly. Challenging those who deny the existence of consciousness, he wonders how to argue with them. "Should I pinch [those people] to remind them they are conscious?" remarks Searle. "Should I pinch myself and report the results in the Journal of Philosophy?"

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

One can only investigate their own consciousness, so we can't outrule chatbots are also having some subjective experience 🙃

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 2 points 9 months ago

I might as well suppose the same of grep then.

[–] forrgott@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

I don't know if I love or hate your comment. (Yes, you're right, shut up.) Well played, Internet stranger.

[–] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's what the "language" part of "Large Language Model" means. It processes, predicts and generates language. You can omit the chat part if you want, but it's still a text prompt to text response generator. The chat part just feeds it back the last couple messages for context. It doesn't understand anything.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

That's what the "language" part of "Large Language Model" means. It processes, predicts and generates language.

Language does not mean "text". It's not "Large Text Generator". The core definition of the word language is "communication".

An LLM isn't (always) trained exclusively on text. And even those that are become greater than the raw sum of its parts. What that means is that the model can learn context not in the raw text itself.

The chat part just feeds it back the last couple messages for context

Partially true. There's more to it though.

It doesn't understand anything.

And neither does antivirus, but it still does its job.