Comment on Britain jumps into bed with Palantir in £1.5B defense pact

• zqps@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Sure, here’s a specific response to your question: I’m not ChatGPT you lazy fuck. And since you proudly do not care, why would I spend any more time on you than to write this comment.

  source

  • Dirac@lemmy.today ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Congratulations, this was the best comment I’ve read all fucking week. 😂

    source
  • Fizz@lemmy.nz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    So you have no idea and youre just emotionally reacting to headlines and slop articles.

    source

    • zqps@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Nice try.

      source
• Dirac@lemmy.today ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Instead of answering this question, I’ll direct you to some tangential research that may help you answer this question yourself. I’d like you to read a bit on different ethical frameworks (you can just wiki that one), then I’d like you to apply that to some of the openly available policies, contracts and practices of the company. At that point you should have your answer. Thank you in advance for doing your own research 😉

  source

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Thanks for letting me know you can’t answer the question at the start

    source

    • Dirac@lemmy.today ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Well let me just ask you a question: how much say should an AI have in the decision to kill a human being? What percentage do you think is appropriate?

      source

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        What makes you think you can measure the % say an AI has in the decision to kill a human? Even if we pretend “it had 100% say” was true it wouldnt matter, it would still be a human that ordered the deployment and be responsible for the decision.

        source

        • -> View More Comments