This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
In that context, I give it to you. Once you have a single robot that can dice an onion AND mop a floor AND determine if someone has dinned afore dashing, we are fucked as a species.
I just think it is not going to happen any time soon, and will never happen under the current paradigm.
Actually make tactical decisions that pan out, predict other agents consistently, handle complex situations, handle any change in surfaces, and basically do anything at all outside of the renderite test environment.
If a drone fighter gets into a turning fight with a human, of course it will win because it doesn't have any blood; just like I wouldn't win a wrestling mach with an industrial press if I stood underneath it. The solution is for the ape to simply not get into the shitty situation; and current paradigm drones don't have the capacity to consistently force opponents into losing positions.
Big caveat: because I don't know what the drones that CAN do these things look like other than "not like this"; they could be here anytime in a 5-500 year timespan, which doesn't get me any internet points for predicting.
I don't know what you mean by this, are you talking about the control surfaces of the plane getting damaged? Modern planes are fly-by-wire anyway, the computer handles control surfaces. Everything else can be handled by throwing billions of simulated engagements at the machine to train it. AlphaZero can predict other players and make tactical decisions just fine, better than any human.
What complex situation is there where machines can't cope? Airspace violations I guess, where you're not supposed to engage and humans will be snarling on the radio to each other. Is that really relevant to a war situation? Say there is some trick human pilots can pull - it surely can't consistently overcome the advantages of autonomous weapons being cheaper, faster to react, stealthier, longer-range and so on. All it takes is for a OTA patch to remove the exploit, no patch is going to make humans like machines.
Current paradigm drones don't have the capacity to consistently force opponents into losing positions because there's a giant pilot mafia that runs all airforces worldwide that suppresses the development of autonomous fighters. The X-47 is decade old technology and worked fine, they just decided to convert it from recon-strike to refuelling manned aircraft. The program was eventually scrapped for no clear reason. Of course airforces don't want to give up their prestigious, expensive manned jets, they don't want to say goodbye to the romance of air warfare (which is pretty dumb seeing how they just fling BVR missiles at eachother these days). Cavalry didn't want to give up the lance, why would pilots want to give their money and culture away to limpwristed programmers?
I just saw this lol
If you are still interested: I use the word surfaces here to mean interface between the world model of a given system and the sense data it is receiving; which is kinda specific and maybe only means anything to me.
It is a hard problem to create a system that can handle a sudden change in surfaces in this sense without resorting to a million zillion special cases, which is what we do now.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link