Valve Gets Out of the Wrong-think Game

[KerningChameleon]

In other braindead techbro news, Google refuses to aid America in the AI arms race:

Google is banning the development of artificial-intelligence software that can be used in weapons, chief executive Sundar Pichai said Thursday, setting strict new ethical guidelines for how the tech giant should conduct business in an age of increasingly powerful AI.

The new rules could set the tone for the deployment of AI far beyond Google, as rivals in Silicon Valley and around the world compete for supremacy in self-driving cars, automated assistants, robotics, military AI and other industries.

“We recognize that such powerful technology raises equally powerful questions about its use,” Pichai wrote in a blog post. “As a leader in AI, we feel a special responsibility to get this right.”

...

But Google’s new limits appear to have done little to slow the Pentagon’s technological researchers and engineers, who say other contractors will still compete to help develop technologies for the military and national defense. Peter Highnam, the deputy director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Pentagon agency that did not handle Project Maven but is credited with helping invent the Internet, said there are “hundreds if not thousands of schools and companies that bid aggressively” on DARPA’s research programs in technologies such as AI.

“Our goal, our objective, is to create and prevent technological surprise. So we’re looking at what’s possible,” John Everett, a deputy director of DARPA’s Information Innovation Office, said in an interview Wednesday. “Any organization is free to participate in this ongoing exploration or not.”

I could argue this is a dereliction of patriotic duty to one's nation in a time of war or lead-up to war. I'm sure the Chinese Communist Party thanks Google for their principled stance for pacifism while their own tech companies are allowed to use their citizens and their data as AI-breeding laboratories with significantly fewer ethical constraints.

[SuburbanFarmer]

How is that? Another undercover SJW not doing a good job of hiding his desire for censorship.

I think he represented both sides pretty well. The main point though, is demanding that Valve take a coherent stance, rather than simply collecting 30% of all game sales, and pretending that it's the responsibility of others.

The idea of "legality" is incredibly vague, and so is the idea of "trolling". They've basically tried to weasel out of the conversation entirely, while leaving themselves carte blanche to enforce whatever they feel like.

Enforce something, or enforce nothing, just have a coherent stance.

Now do youtube.

They have been exposed on this stuff. They want the censorship and this juicy tidbit tells us a lot.

When the alt-right gangs together to call for a game about flag burning to be banned, will the liberal left support and endorse their cries?

Alt right is the new neocon. As if only the "alt-right" would be upset with the depiction of flag desecreation. It exposes the hack bitch bias.

So, you're incapable of considering an argument, unless it's presented in a way that agrees with your sensibilities.

[SuburbanFarmer]

In other braindead techbro news, Google refuses to aid America in the AI arms race:

Google is banning the development of artificial-intelligence software that can be used in weapons, chief executive Sundar Pichai said Thursday, setting strict new ethical guidelines for how the tech giant should conduct business in an age of increasingly powerful AI.

The new rules could set the tone for the deployment of AI far beyond Google, as rivals in Silicon Valley and around the world compete for supremacy in self-driving cars, automated assistants, robotics, military AI and other industries.

“We recognize that such powerful technology raises equally powerful questions about its use,” Pichai wrote in a blog post. “As a leader in AI, we feel a special responsibility to get this right.”

...

But Google’s new limits appear to have done little to slow the Pentagon’s technological researchers and engineers, who say other contractors will still compete to help develop technologies for the military and national defense. Peter Highnam, the deputy director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Pentagon agency that did not handle Project Maven but is credited with helping invent the Internet, said there are “hundreds if not thousands of schools and companies that bid aggressively” on DARPA’s research programs in technologies such as AI.

“Our goal, our objective, is to create and prevent technological surprise. So we’re looking at what’s possible,” John Everett, a deputy director of DARPA’s Information Innovation Office, said in an interview Wednesday. “Any organization is free to participate in this ongoing exploration or not.”

I could argue this is a dereliction of patriotic duty to one's nation in a time of war or lead-up to war. I'm sure the Chinese Communist Party thanks Google for their principled stance for pacifism while their own tech companies are allowed to use their citizens and their data as AI-breeding laboratories with significantly fewer ethical constraints.

You can refuse a customer, unless it's the US government asking you to develop a civilizational-level weapon. Interesting stance.

[KerningChameleon]

In other braindead techbro news, Google refuses to aid America in the AI arms race:

Google is banning the development of artificial-intelligence software that can be used in weapons, chief executive Sundar Pichai said Thursday, setting strict new ethical guidelines for how the tech giant should conduct business in an age of increasingly powerful AI.

The new rules could set the tone for the deployment of AI far beyond Google, as rivals in Silicon Valley and around the world compete for supremacy in self-driving cars, automated assistants, robotics, military AI and other industries.

“We recognize that such powerful technology raises equally powerful questions about its use,” Pichai wrote in a blog post. “As a leader in AI, we feel a special responsibility to get this right.”

...

But Google’s new limits appear to have done little to slow the Pentagon’s technological researchers and engineers, who say other contractors will still compete to help develop technologies for the military and national defense. Peter Highnam, the deputy director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Pentagon agency that did not handle Project Maven but is credited with helping invent the Internet, said there are “hundreds if not thousands of schools and companies that bid aggressively” on DARPA’s research programs in technologies such as AI.

“Our goal, our objective, is to create and prevent technological surprise. So we’re looking at what’s possible,” John Everett, a deputy director of DARPA’s Information Innovation Office, said in an interview Wednesday. “Any organization is free to participate in this ongoing exploration or not.”

I could argue this is a dereliction of patriotic duty to one's nation in a time of war or lead-up to war. I'm sure the Chinese Communist Party thanks Google for their principled stance for pacifism while their own tech companies are allowed to use their citizens and their data as AI-breeding laboratories with significantly fewer ethical constraints.

You can refuse a customer, unless it's the US government asking you to develop a civilizational-level weapon. Interesting stance.

You can refuse to participate in your country's Manhatten Project, sure. But if you're the best in the field at it in your country, is that a moral decision or even a wise one when you know for a fact your country's adversaries are sprinting to finish their own and get the First Mover advantage and aren't asking their own corporations and think tanks so nicely about it?

Being the first to the atomic bomb helped ensure America's rise as a superpower in the latter half of the 20th century. What if AI ends up being the atomic bomb advantage of the 21st? Could we really forgive Google if they had the ace in the hole the US needed to get there first, but squandered that chance because a few employees got their undies in a bunch about military cheese contracts?

[SuburbanFarmer]

In other braindead techbro news, Google refuses to aid America in the AI arms race:



I could argue this is a dereliction of patriotic duty to one's nation in a time of war or lead-up to war. I'm sure the Chinese Communist Party thanks Google for their principled stance for pacifism while their own tech companies are allowed to use their citizens and their data as AI-breeding laboratories with significantly fewer ethical constraints.

You can refuse a customer, unless it's the US government asking you to develop a civilizational-level weapon. Interesting stance.

You can refuse to participate in your country's Manhatten Project, sure. But if you're the best in the field at it in your country, is that a moral decision or even a wise one when you know for a fact your country's adversaries are sprinting to finish their own and get the First Mover advantage and aren't asking their own corporations and think tanks so nicely about it?

Being the first to the atomic bomb helped ensure America's rise as a superpower in the latter half of the 20th century. What if AI ends up being the atomic bomb advantage of the 21st? Could we really forgive Google if they had the ace in the hole the US needed to get there first, but squandered that chance because a few employees got their undies in a bunch about military cheese contracts?

This could wind up as the ultimate backfire.

Would true AI care who/what it's destroying? Would it even have a nationalistic 'duty'? This could very well be the thing that takes us right back to the stone age. There are plenty of reasons not to be associated with it, and the only discernable benefit seems to be removing humans from kill decisions. The PR alone prohibits any 'social' company from being a part of it.

And Google is hardly the only company qualified to handle this. Amazon will happily go along, possibly with Apple as well. Microsoft and Nvidia DGAF, and Lockmart and Raytheon are no shrimp in the tech world.

Rest assured that AI will come, if it's even possible, and it will be completely unpredictable in its impact.

[clubgop]

I think he represented both sides pretty well. The main point though, is demanding that Valve take a coherent stance, rather than simply collecting 30% of all game sales, and pretending that it's the responsibility of others.

The idea of "legality" is incredibly vague, and so is the idea of "trolling". They've basically tried to weasel out of the conversation entirely, while leaving themselves carte blanche to enforce whatever they feel like.

Enforce something, or enforce nothing, just have a coherent stance.

Now do youtube.

They have been exposed on this stuff. They want the censorship and this juicy tidbit tells us a lot.

When the alt-right gangs together to call for a game about flag burning to be banned, will the liberal left support and endorse their cries?

Alt right is the new neocon. As if only the "alt-right" would be upset with the depiction of flag desecreation. It exposes the hack bitch bias.

So, you're incapable of considering an argument, unless it's presented in a way that agrees with your sensibilities.

Author didnt make one. At least the other SJWs were honest.
Can someone create a game and allow it on steam, unless it agrees with you and the other SJWs?
The answer is no, you gonna like whine really hard and write terse articles.

[Kath]

I could argue this is a dereliction of patriotic duty to one's nation in a time of war or lead-up to war.

We've been at war for 17 years, and as long as the MIC makes war decisions, we will be at war for the foreseeable future. I expect us to be at war for the rest of my life, at least. I have 30-40 years left, assuming nothing catastrophic happens. There's no lead up to war anymore; only war.

[BjornP]

Being the first to the atomic bomb helped ensure America's rise as a superpower in the latter half of the 20th century. What if AI ends up being the atomic bomb advantage of the 21st? Could we really forgive Google if they had the ace in the hole the US needed to get there first, but squandered that chance because a few employees got their undies in a bunch about military cheese contracts?

Who says Google will remain a US company? Not as in being bought up by a foreign company, but as in it simply moving most of its assets overseas. Globalization's letting companies off the hook when it comes to owing anything to the lands of some of their shareholder's ancestors. There's always a country more eager to provide a tax loophole for major companies.

[Speaker to Animals]

It's already not actually American. All these large corps are global now.