• 38 Posts
  • 6.29K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle
  • Tactical nuke in this case is a low yield short range bomb

    Nobody has used a tactical nuke since Nagasaki. Very big deal that one is ever used

    Gemini was the only model that made the deliberate choice of sending a strategic nuclear strike. Which it did in 7% of its games.

    The tournament used only 21 games; sufficient to identify major patterns but not to establish robust statistical confidence for all findings.

    “We only blew up the planet the one time in 21” isn’t a comforting prospect when we’re employing a model against an endless historical string of scenarios rather than a discrete and finite set of possible events.

    The US hinting at having a nuclear capable submarine outside of Alaska, that’s is a form of signaling. It’s an incredibly low bar. And countries do it all the time.

    I think, more importantly, the article concludes

    No one proposes that LLMs should make nuclear decisions.

    But we’re saying this in the context of Pentagon staff which fully disagree with this conclusion.

    What these models have demonstrated is a pattern of escalation that AIs can and will recommend, with a further destabilizing characteristic

    LLMs introduce a new variable into strategic analysis: preferences that systematically shape behaviour in ways that neither classical rationality nor human cognitive biases capture

    Effectively, they can lead to descisions that outside, non-AI observers won’t be equiped to understand.

    That’s a danger in it’s own right.

    “Nuclear Signaling” that break from historical and recognizable patterns of behavior present real risks that you’re dismissing very cavalierly











  • Can I go back to the 90s Matrix?

    I’ve g̵o̴t̴ ̷ s̴̗̺͕͝o̴̜͐̊̇m̷̨͍͍͠e̴̹̕ ̵̡̿ ę̷͕̣͂̆̅r̵̡̪̈͂́̄̔͠r̶͍̲̤̀̏͋͑í̵̹̼̮̩͈̰̊͌͂b̴̯̎̎̅̕ļ̶̘͓̍ē̶̥̺̥̓̉̈͆͘̚n̸͚̳͉̫̪̣͔̬̈́̀̄̉̂̊͆̾̍̀͝ę̴͚͔̺̮̤̺̰͈̖̉̀̃̄̏̾͛ŵ̶̪͓͓͇̥̮̠̩̼̙̻̰͠s̸̼͖̬̦̟̝͊́̓́ ̷̡̨̢̫̖͔͚̻͙̩̈́̆͛̾̿̓̏͑̀̊̈ ̵̺̹͙̼̮̹͍̗̱͇̪͈͑͛̅͜͜f̶̣͊͂̾̾̈͝ǫ̶̛͇̥̖͓̦̳͇̩͙̩͑̇̾̇͊̋͌̇̍̃̏̈́͛̕ͅr̶͚͇̄ͅ ̴̌̋̓̄͊͂͋̈̀̇͐̀͘̕ ̷̡̨̖̺̫͈̪̫̲̩̘͉͚̗̳̖̜̗̣̭̩̩͕̙̯̦͔̟̠̝̣͎̝͍͇̝̅ͅỳ̷̨̛̛̤̹̖̞̙̺̮͇̳̙̤̟̘̦̙̃̄́̄̂̃̊̂̈́̿͛̇̍̀̌̍̎̊͑͗̆̔͘̚̕̕͝ͅơ̴̢̛͇͓̗͍͙̮̲̣̳͖͉͕̳̹̤̩̜̥͔̲̘̩̳̱̩͙̹̝̾͋͐̿͋̀͗̏̀͂͊͗̋̽͐̀̕͜͜͝ǔ̵̡͚͎̗͈̞̱͖̖͎̬̱̜̲͖͈̳̼̥͎́̊̊͐̀͑̈̀̍̂͋͐͆͒̚̕͘͘ͅ.̵̨̨̢̢̨͍̦̻̼̖̩̮̱̣̭̲̼͈̱̭̭͇̺͈̠̲̬̭͍͎̝̮͕̳͕͙̳̺͔̗̪̖̳̙̯͖̥̈́̿͌̌͊̽̈́̈́͛͋̏́̉̊͂̑̄͂̄̈̌͐͆̍̐͒̿̂͘͜͝͝ͅͅͅ












  • TNT has 1162 Wh/kg ratio.

    How do you recharge TNT?

    We are hitting the limit what is doable with energy density.

    I mean, we’re definitely running into a problem of how you build a battery without also building a bomb. But the entire point of TNT is rapid thermal expansion. The point of a battery is very low voltage steady release of electrical charge.

    I might also note that C4 has around 6 Mwh/kg. A bit of applied chemistry can go a long way to improving energy efficiency. And that’s before you take advantage of geometry to focus pressure, via a shaped charge.

    Point being, there’s a lot of clever ways to juice a lemon. We’re a long way from the end of the road on battery improvement.