#AI in Military Applications

[neosciencehub]

Intelligent Robotic Teammate for Defence Soldiers

Intelligent Robotic Teammate for Defence Soldiers @neosciencehub #neosciencehub #science #Robotics #Defense #AI #MilitaryApplications #AutonomousSystems #CognitiveRobotics #TechnologicalInnovations #research #industry #IITDelhi #risk

IIT Delhi Pioneers Development of a Teammate A team of researchers from the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, in collaboration with the Defence-Industry-Academia Centre of Excellence (DIA-CoE) and the DRDO Centre for Artificial Intelligence & Robotics (CAIR), has made a significant breakthrough in robotic technology at the IInvenTive 2024 R&D fair. The project, led by Prof. Rohan Paul and…

[nowpope]

@alulars

Drones (autnonomous drones) are legally and ethically contentious in information software, especially in pushing the path of humanity forwards. Communications, medicine, education, defence.

Human pilots are directly responsible for their actions on a legal basis. Their wills occupy their outcomes, secondary to the Absolute. For this reason, shooting down a drone may not provoke the same political or emotional response as shooting down a manned aircraft. A good and a bad, depending on the framework.

The year is 2045. We are in a stage of hybrid drone warfare. Manned-Unmanned Teaming: a human pilot in a stealth fighter commanding a kill-web of loyal drones (loyal wingmen.)

The Catholic church and the temple before that temple have known the necessity of a hierarchical chain of command, and accountability, far longer. Both for military personnel and the masses, there's pride (and terror) in a man in the ambo.

Johnson is not a remarkable man. He is a saint. Given the nature of what Johnson has become here, allegedly, must make Pope Clement what he must be: a detective.

The adobe floor is clean. The Vatican floor is also clean. White and unaccompanied, but not alone, he sprawls across, almost - rather than occupying - one of the small, unoccupied chairs. The pristine antenna of his left shin strays far out from under the wood lip of his desk to accommodate.

He stops smiling after a while, not insincerely- it strikes him that the sentiment is already redundant. "Johnson would be your," picking up the thread in the middle of the conversation that they were not having. "trible, dynastic, family name?"

[jcmarchi]

Anthropic and Meta in Defense: The New Frontier of Military AI Applications

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/anthropic-and-meta-in-defense-the-new-frontier-of-military-ai-applications/

Anthropic and Meta in Defense: The New Frontier of Military AI Applications

Imagine a future where drones operate with incredible precision, battlefield strategies adapt in real-time, and military decisions are powered by AI systems that continuously learn from each mission. This future is no longer a distant possibility. Instead, it is happening now. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has evolved from a promising concept to an essential part of modern defense, offering capabilities once confined to science fiction. Its impact is felt across operations, from real-time intelligence analysis to autonomous systems that reduce risks for human personnel.

Companies like Anthropic and Meta are leading this development. Their innovations, including advanced AI tools and immersive training technologies, redefine how militaries prepare, protect, and respond to emerging threats. These advancements enhance efficiency and provide critical support in high-stakes situations where every decision counts.

How AI is Transforming Military Strategies

AI is changing the way militaries plan, operate, and protect. Over the past decade, its role in defense has expanded rapidly. Initially focused on automating basic processes like logistics and maintenance, AI now drives critical functions such as surveillance, predictive analytics, and autonomous operations.

Historical milestones like Project Maven demonstrated AI’s ability to analyze vast surveillance data and identify threats faster than traditional methods. This program fueled the interest in AI’s military potential and highlighted the ethical challenges of using AI in warfare. Today, AI applications in defense include real-time intelligence analysis, advanced cybersecurity measures, and autonomous drones capable of operating in complex environments. Nations like the United States, China, and members of NATO are investing heavily in these technologies to maintain strategic advantages.

AI’s adaptability allows militaries to respond to rapidly changing scenarios, making it indispensable for modern defense systems. However, its adoption raises questions about oversight and ethical use, requiring careful consideration of global policies and guidelines to ensure responsible deployment.

Anthropic’s Contributions to Military AI

Anthropic is a leader in AI safety, focusing on creating systems that are reliable, interpretable, and aligned with human values. Its Claude models, including the latest Claude 3 and 3.5, are designed to process vast amounts of data while adhering to strict safety protocols. These models excel in risk assessment, decision-making, and intelligence analysis, making them highly relevant to military operations.

Anthropic’s partnerships with organizations like Palantir and AWS further extend its capabilities in defense. Palantir’s expertise in data integration and AWS’s secure cloud infrastructure enables Anthropic to deploy scalable AI solutions tailored to military needs. For example, Claude models can analyze intelligence reports, predict potential threats, and assist in formulating strategic responses with speed and accuracy.

A defining feature of Anthropic’s approach is its commitment to ethical AI development. The company prioritizes alignment, ensuring that its models operate transparently and responsibly. This focus on safety and accountability makes Anthropic a trusted partner in military AI, capable of delivering innovative solutions without compromising ethical standards.

Meta’s Role in Defense AI

Meta has become a key player in leading AI for defense. Its Llama models, known for their powerful language processing abilities, play a vital role in intelligence and strategic operations. These models can interpret complex language patterns, decode encrypted messages, and provide actionable insights. This capability helps improve military awareness and decision-making.

Meta’s contributions extend far beyond language analysis. The company is also pioneering using virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) in defense. VR simulations allow soldiers to train in realistic scenarios without the risks of physical exercises. Meanwhile, AR overlays deliver real-time information to ground troops, helping them make faster and better decisions during operations.

Meta has partnered with major defense contractors like Accenture and Lockheed Martin to bring these technologies into real-world use. By integrating AI into existing military systems, Meta is improving operational efficiency and preparedness. Its focus on creating scalable and flexible solutions ensures these tools can be adapted to various defense needs.

Persistent Memory for Smarter Military Applications

Persistent memory is redefining how AI systems operate in defense. Unlike traditional systems that rely on short-term memory, persistent memory enables AI to retain and recall information over time. This capability is critical for military applications, where continuity and context are essential.

For example, AI systems with persistent memory can analyze historical data to identify patterns and anticipate threats. In autonomous systems like drones and robotic vehicles, persistent memory allows for real-time adaptability, ensuring these technologies can respond effectively to changing environments. Intelligence tools with persistent memory can build comprehensive profiles over time, delivering deeper insights and improving decision-making.

Technologies such as memory-augmented neural networks and vector databases drive these advancements, optimizing data storage and retrieval for military applications. By combining long-term data retention with fast processing speeds, these systems enable more efficient and adaptive defense operations.

Latest Trends and Innovations in Military AI

Military AI is evolving quickly, with new technologies being developed to meet the demands of modern defense. One key advancement is the rise of hybrid memory systems. These systems allow AI to manage both short-term and long-term data effectively. Combining immediate responsiveness with the ability to analyze historical information makes AI more adaptable and reliable in real-time operations.

Another exciting trend is using advanced AI frameworks to improve systems’ handling of complex scenarios. These tools help AI adapt to changing environments, making it more effective in tasks like intelligence analysis and decision-making under pressure. This adaptability is critical for dynamic military situations where speed and accuracy are essential.

Global investments in military AI have surged over the past two years. Data from 2023-2024 shows a clear focus on real-time threat detection, predictive analytics, and immersive training simulations. AI-powered training platforms, for example, now create realistic combat scenarios that help soldiers refine their strategies without physical risks.

Collaboration between governments, tech companies, and defense contractors leads to innovation. Many nations prioritize AI for applications like cybersecurity, autonomous systems, and logistics, further embedding it into defense operations. These advancements are enhancing efficiency and redefining how militaries prepare for and respond to evolving threats.

Challenges and Ethical Considerations

While AI is transforming military operations, its implementation also has significant challenges. A major issue is scalability. Military AI systems must process vast amounts of data quickly, often in high-pressure situations. Building the infrastructure to handle this data efficiently without slowing operations is tough, especially when speed and accuracy are critical.

Privacy and security are equally important. In defense, AI involves handling sensitive military information, which raises questions about who controls the data and how it is protected. Strong encryption and compliance with GDPR are essential to secure this information. Transparency is also important and demands that everyone involved understand how the data is collected, stored, and used.

Another challenge is bias in AI systems. If the AI is trained on flawed or incomplete data, it can lead to inaccurate or unfair outcomes, which could have serious consequences in military contexts. Lessons from past projects, like Project Maven, highlight the need for regular testing, diverse datasets, and ongoing oversight to ensure fairness and accuracy.

Finally, there is a need for global cooperation and clear ethical guidelines. As more nations adopt AI for defense, the need for shared standards and regulations creates risks. Collaborative efforts are needed to ensure AI is used responsibly and doesn’t lead to unintended harm.

The Bottom Line

Anthropic and Meta are leading to new advancements in military AI. Their advanced technologies make defense systems smarter, more efficient, and highly adaptive. From powerful decision-making tools to immersive training solutions, they change how militaries function.

However, this progress brings significant responsibilities and challenges. Issues like scalability, privacy, and fairness must be addressed with care. Clear policies and transparent practices are essential to ensure AI is used responsibly. Global collaboration is also needed to create ethical standards for military AI.

By balancing innovation with accountability, the defense sector can achieve more than just better security. It can build AI systems that are both effective and trustworthy, shaping a safer and more connected future for everyone.

[zomb13s]

Unveiling the Beauty of AI Stealth Aircraft: Beyond the Battlefield

In a world where technology constantly pushes the boundaries of innovation, it’s not uncommon for breakthroughs to emerge from unexpected sources. One such realm of technological marvels is the military, where advancements in stealth aircraft technology have sparked the imagination of enthusiasts and innovators alike. Enter Randy Daha, a passionate advocate for the aesthetics and adaptability of…

[jikooklove9795]

https://www.tumblr.com/jikooklove9795/764513509135548416/all-the-antis-mad-cause-jungkook-said-jimin-and?source=share

I so love it when they can't use their "only Jimin is mentioning JK, JK isn't saying anything he's just minding his own business in the military because he's not a leech & attention seeker" delusional anti card.

But what constantly proves to me that these people are truly sick mentally and actually need serious help is how Jimin is the one who continues to get hate even if JK is the one who mentions him or initiates stuff with him. JJKs especially always give those vibes of miserable women who attack the other woman and tells her "stay away from my man, slut" even though they know very well it's her man who is constantly running after that woman.

The things they'd say about Jimin every time JK mentioned him in his lives, commented about him & stayed up watching him on his TV... Good lord🤦🏾‍♀

Hi Anon! There's a whole circus going on in X after the weverse messages dropped. The sole reason being Jungkook mentioning "Jimin and I ". Thats all it took for them to lose their minds. I'm pretty sure they would be cool with it if it was any other member whom Jungkook had mentioned in the place of Jimin.

You would already know the reason for their despicable behavior. They see what we see. They see how Jungkook behaves in the typical boyfriend/ husband way when it comes to Jimin.

They have seen the RB Ear Suck and that soft peck to Jimin's ear afterwards. They have seen Jungkook strutting around with a HICKEY from Jimin. Refusing to conceal it. Refusing others to touch it. Here, also the exception being Jimin whom he allows to caress it. They have seen Jungkook being protective towards Jimin. From airports to even standing up against his Hyungs ( Poor Yoongi in Run BTS ep 100 😅 )

They have seen Jungkook making sexual jokes with Jimin. They have seen Jungkook get annoyed at fans who were asking Jimin to marry them at an Award Show

They have seen GCF Tokyo. The entire existence of which makes any anti jikooker angry and insecure. They have seen all the other GCFs which followed and realized how Jungkook made sure that Jimin is highlighted in each one

They have heard members complaining how Jungkook gave a bday gift only to Jimin

They have seen and heard about the fan sightings of Jungkook with Jimin OUTSIDE THEIR SCHEDULES OFF CAMERA. Some of them being on romantic holidays

They have heard members saying how Jungkook is always in Jimin and Hoseok's room while they were in the dorm. They have seen this VMINKOOK Live, had their heart shattered after hearing this TMI

They have seen Jungkook's 2023 Lives where he spent hours watching Jimin content, lit up while reading Jimin's messages, asking Jimin to come over, asking if he could go over to Jimin's house, seen him flirting with Jimin while we all third wheeled.

They have seen Jungkook come forward denying the claims of him having a gf. EVERY SINGLE TIME. He even posted this video with the caption " I go the other way ". Posted it, deleted it. Knowing the point has been made

I don't know how they survived AYS??!!

They have seen how Jungkook made sure that Jimin appeared in his documentary

The final blow to them ( for the time being ) Jungkook enlisting with Jimin using companion system

When antis were celebrating Jikook being " distant " during the early months of 2023 Jungkook and Jimin were trying everything in their power to make sure they wouldn't be separated for the coming 18 months.

They have seen how even after Jikook got the confirmation of their applications being accepted and approved they continued traveling together. Wanting to spend as much time TOGETHER, creating memories to look back at while serving in the military ( Jungkook's own words ).

And here comes antis with their worn out trump card " Jungkook was forced ". I just feel like laughing. Cause they sound so childish. Don't they know the man who they claim to love? They do but they ignore it, twist his words and make him look like a company puppet. Cause thats the only way they can justify his actions with Jimin.

Jungkook is forced to interact with someone who he doesn't want to? This is the same man who was told not to get tattoos but got a full sleeve of them. This is the same man who stared down the fans who called him Oppa. The same man who folded his briefs on a live. The same man who fell asleep on his live. The same man who questioned the fans on why he shouldn't release an explicit version of his song.

He was brought up in a way where his parents let him do anything he wanted to. They only corrected him if he did something obviously wrong. This makes him an authentic, sincere person. Not the fickle minded, company puppet they want him to be for their own reasons.

He will never be the person who they want him to be. So, its better if they try to know the real him and love him for who he is.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Once the AI bubble bursts, that doesn’t mean chatbots and image generators will be relegated to the trash bin of history. Rather, there will be a reassessment of where it makes sense to implement them, and if attention moves on too fast, they may be able to do that with minimal pushback. The challenge visual artists and video game workers are already finding with employers making use of generative AI to worsen the labor conditions in their industries may become entrenched, especially if artists fail in their lawsuits against AI companies for training on their work without permission. But it could be far worse than that. Microsoft is already partnering with Palantir to feed generative AI into militaries and intelligence agencies, while governments around the world are looking at how they can implement generative AI to reduce the cost of service delivery, often without effective consideration of the potential harms that can come of relying on tools that are well known to output false information. This is a problem Resisting AI author Dan McQuillan has pointed to as a key reason why we must push back against these technologies. There are already countless examples of algorithmic systems have been used to harm welfare recipients, childcare benefit applicants, immigrants, and other vulnerable groups. We risk a repetition, if not an intensification, of those harmful outcomes. When the AI bubble bursts, investors will lose money, companies will close, and workers will lose jobs. Those developments will be splashed across the front pages of major media organizations and will receive countless hours of public discussion. But it’s those lasting harms that will be harder to immediately recognize, and that could fade as the focus moves on to whatever Silicon Valley places starts pushing as the foundation of its next investment cycle. All the benefits Altman and his fellow AI boosters promised will fade, just as did the promises of the gig economy, the metaverse, the crypto industry, and countless others. But the harmful uses of the technology will stick around, unless concerted action is taken to stop those use cases from lingering long after the bubble bursts.

16 August 2024

[satanfemme]

also last thought for now before I log off but it's been increasingly bothering me that everyone who's staunchly anti-ai only ever preaches about the supposed harm of ai-assisted art or chat bots (functionally harmless technologies), meanwhile there ARE actually harmful applications of technology that falls under the ai umbrella, namely ai usage by the police or military to further mistreat and oppress and kill people both domestically and abroad. but for some reason I never see viral posts on tumblr about the harm of ai in these contexts. it's only ever out of context/falsified statistics about data center cooling, or disney-esque manifestos about how intellectual property law needs to be tightened. maybe this is a "whataboutism" but I just get the sense that the current wave of people who hate ai are barking up the wrong tree and need to (and have the potential to) redirect that energy if they want to do something actually useful.

[shunin-gumis]

Designs of Happiness - Track A21

L4mps Main Story Translation

Title: As a Human Representative

Characters: Daniel, Nagi, Netaro

Summary: Daniel finds Nagi collapsed in the lounge area. Although Nagi did not reveal the reason for it, he had discovered Netaro’s true identity… 

Thank you aca @463ce6, myun @/myuntachis Niri @/Niri_riri and jes @/arcanecrayonn for helping me with proofing!

Location: Hakodate - Hotel Lounge

Daniel: Phew… This is pure bliss~ Saunas really are the best… 

Daniel: Huh?

Nagi: …… 

Daniel: Nagi, what’re you all sprawled out on the ground for? 

Nagi: …… 

Daniel: I get that it was too hot for you, but you're just gonna end up catching a cold if you do that right after a bath.

Nagi: …… 

Daniel: You could at least— Wait, is he knocked out!? 

Daniel: Nagi, you okay!? Get a hold of yourself! 

Nagi: Ugh… Buchi-san… 

Daniel: Good, at least you’re conscious. Did you get dizzy? 

*Netaro pops out from behind Nagi*

Netaro: I believe this is a minor case of anemia. 

Daniel: Woah– Damn, you scared me. Didn’t know you were here too. 

Netaro: Mhm.

Daniel: At least help him out instead of just sitting on your ass with popsicles in both hands!

Netaro: Nyam nyam. 

Daniel: Nagi, think you can stand?

Netaro: Can you~?

Nagi: …Oh, yeah. 

Daniel: What’s wrong? Was it really just anemia? 

Nagi: …… 

~~~(flashback)

Netaro: Hm… So be it. I was inclined to hold back for a while longer, but now that it’s come to this—

Netaro: You’ll have to suffice.

Nagi: *fearful breathing*

Nagi: (I feel like I’ve been struck with sleep paralysis— )

Netaro: You’re unable to move, aren’t you~ It seems the heat from the sauna has caused me to glitch, you see. 

Netaro: I cannot even mimic the human form at this moment… 

Nagi: (M-Mimic…?)

Netaro: Would you like to see my true form? I’m right beside you. 

Nagi: !?

Netaro: Those retinae of yours cannot retain my image, so I’m Invisible Netaro now.

Netaro: In accordance with Article 1156 of the Interstellar Constitution established by my planet, any local lifeform that learns of my true form is applicable to receive necessary information and given the opportunity to make a choice.

Netaro: At the same time, exceptional measures are to be taken in the event of the endangerment of an official investigator, such as myself.

Nagi: (????)

Netaro: I, Netaro Yowa, am an extraterrestrial lifeform from the planet “Proxima Centauri b,” designated as such by you earthlings. I have arrived here for the sake of a certain mission.

Netaro: As this mission is top secret, you will not be made aware of the details, even if you choose to follow Article 1156.

Netaro: My main goal is to conduct an investigation on the primary lifeform on this planet, the human race, at a military-level secret operation. However, in the event of an emergency, my life is to be prioritized over that of the local lifeform. 

Nagi: (W-Which means…?)

Netaro: In order to maintain my continued activities on this planet, as well as my mimicry of the human form, I need to intake a specific amount of adaptive factors within a fixed timeframe.

Netaro: I would like you to act as my prospective donor. 

Nagi: (I don’t get what he’s saying…)

Netaro: This is all you need to understand—

*Netaro reveals a contract*

Netaro’s Proposed Contract

The following agreement is made and entered into by and between Netaro Yowa (hereafter referred to as “Recipient”) and Nagi Hachinoya (hereafter referred to as “Donor”):

The Donor is to provide the Recipient with a specified amount of his body whenever it is requested of him. a) The frequency and volume may vary, as long as it does not lead to the Donor’s loss of life.

The Donor must not reveal any confidential information about the Recipient to any other lifeform (including AI).

The Donor must cooperate with the Recipient to ensure that no confidential information is revealed to any other lifeform (including AI).

In the event that the Donor breaches any terms of this Agreement, the Interstellar Court will act as the court of instance with exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. The Recipient has the right to restrain the Donor until a resolution is reached.

Netaro: I’m certain those back on my planet will have no complaints in this case. 

Nagi: (This is getting more and more confusing… What does he even mean by “a specified amount of his body”...)

Netaro: As long as it is something produced by your body, anything is fine. I quite prefer blood, myself.

Nagi: !!

Netaro: To put it simply, if you refuse to act as my donor and protect my secret, you will die. 

Nagi: !?

Netaro: Local lifeform Nagi: You have two choices.

Netaro: To agree to this contract, or to be eaten whole by me; which do you prefer?

Nagi: …!

Netaro: Will you cry? Are you tearing up~? I enjoy tears almost as much as I do blood~

Nagi: …… 

Nagi: Will it hurt…?

Netaro: I could indeed compound a drug that could numb your sense of pain, but that will have to be for next time!

Nagi: I won’t… die, right…?

Netaro: You just read the Agreement, did you not!? I wouldn’t want to destroy a precious dispenser of adaptive factor!

Netaro: Though, I’m not entirely confident, as I’m far too hungry at the moment. 

Nagi: …… 

Nagi: Okay. I’ll do it. 

Netaro: Yaaayyyy~!

Nagi: Even if I did die, it’s not like it would affect anybody. 

Nagi: You might be an alien, but I don’t think it’s very nice to leave someone alone when they’re suffering… 

Nagi: I don’t want you to have a bad impression of earthlings… 

Netaro: Good. You are prepared, yes? 

Nagi: Huh, wait– Right now? Here!? Hold on–

Nagi: A-Ahhhhhhhhhhh………

~~~(end flashback)

Location: Hakodate - Hotel Lounge

Daniel: …Nagi, you listening? 

Nagi: *gasp* Oh, sorry… 

Daniel: You sure it’s just anemia? 

Nagi: Yeah. I’m okay now. 

Daniel: Alright, then sit down over there. You want a popsicle? 

Nagi: Oh, but I already had one so… 

Daniel: Then I’ll give you my share. What flavor do you want? 

Nagi: Thank you… Then, I’d like pineapple. 

Daniel: Got it. Netaro over there is just stuffing himself on these though, geez. 

Netaro: Nyam nyam.

Nagi: …… 

Daniel: Here. 

Nagi: Thank you.

Nagi: …… 

Nagi: (This is orange…)

Netaro: Delicious, is it not? Gii.

Nagi: Urk… Yeah, it is… 

Netaro: Shall I share some of my grape-flavored one with you? 

Nagi: …!

*Nagi bumps into Daniel*

Daniel: Woah there, what’s wrong? You just sprang out of your seat like some grasshopper. 

Nagi: It’s… nothing. Sorry. 

Netaro: Even though it’s so delicious… 

Nagi: …… 

Notes:

Proxima Centauri b is an exoplanet orbiting within the habitable zone of the red dwarf star Proxima Centauri, which is the closest star to the Sun and part of the larger triple star system Alpha Centauri.

<- Previous | Next ->

Masterlist

[mariacallous]

The Trump administration’s pledge to revoke the student visas of Chinese students in the United States could inadvertently be a boon for China, which has long been eager to woo back top talent to advance its tech and AI sectors. 

In its crusade against American universities, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced last week that the Trump administration would “aggressively revoke” the visas of Chinese international students, including “those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party [CCP] or studying in critical fields.” The administration will also intensify scrutiny of all future visa applications from China and Hong Kong, Rubio said. 

Beijing has for decades strived to develop its own research and talent pipelines—ambitions that may now also be boosted by the Trump administration’s continued threats and ongoing visa uncertainty. Roughly one-quarter of all international students in the United States come from China, which until recently sent more students to America than any other nation. 

“China has wanted to hold onto the talent for a long time, and that’s one of the big reasons why they expanded their higher-education sector so rapidly in the early 2000s,” said Gaurav Khanna, an economist at the University of California, San Diego. Between 1999 and 2010, college enrollment in China skyrocketed from 1 million to 8 million students—an enormous surge that reflects China’s bid to keep more students in the country and establish itself as a tech and AI hub, Khanna said.

Today, China remains the top source of foreign undergraduate students and second-biggest supplier of graduate students in the United States. But Chinese enrollment in U.S. universities has steadily dropped since 2019, and in the 2023-2024 school year, New Delhi for the first time surpassed Beijing as a top source of students. 

In justifying its policy moves, the Trump administration has accused the Chinese government of exploiting U.S. universities and stealing intellectual property and technology, building on long-running concerns about Chinese espionage that were also rife during the first Trump administration and Biden administration. Former President Joe Biden, for instance, maintained a Trump-era ban on graduate students in STEM fields from Chinese universities with military ties. 

The United States “will not tolerate the [Chinese Communist Party’s] exploitation of U.S. universities or theft of U.S. research intellectual property or technologies to grow its military power, conduct intelligence collection or repress voices of opposition,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said last week. 

A small number of Chinese students have indeed been charged with espionage, as FP’s James Palmer explained in the China Brief newsletter last week. But those cases range “from firm to shaky,” he wrote, and “the total number of instances is a trickle compared to the flood of Chinese students.” 

The Trump administration has so far offered scant information on how exactly its visa revocations would work. On Sunday, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi said that since the policy appears to be targeting all foreign students of Chinese origin—and not just individuals “engaged in nefarious activities” or “deeply connected to the CCP”—the effort is “terribly misguided and it appears prejudicial and discriminatory.” 

Beijing is “cheering for this policy,” Krishnamoorthi added in his interview with CBS on Sunday. “They want these people back. They want the scientists and the entrepreneurs and the engineers who can come and help their economy. And so we are probably helping them, as well as other countries, more than helping ourselves with this policy.”

Chinese state media, for its part, has already seized on the news. “Chinese international students have innocently become political targets for Washington,” one Global Times editorial declared. “This is Washington implementing discriminatory collective restrictions against Chinese students under the unfounded guise of ‘national security.’”

If future cohorts of Chinese students do turn away from the United States, either because of the Trump administration’s visa revocations or as a result of the broader uncertainty, experts warn that U.S. research innovation and the American economy could suffer. 

“America has amassed 25% of global GDP with 4% of the world population, in part, by drawing talent from around the world,” Ryan Hass, the director of the Brookings Institution’s China Center, said in an email to Foreign Policy. “America cuts itself off from global talent at its own peril.”

At the same time, a potential breakdown in research and educational ties would hamstring Beijing’s own research and pipeline ambitions as well. China and the United States are one of the highest collaborators in cross-border patenting, Khanna said, and the erosion of such collaboration would hurt both countries. Beijing also risks losing a stream of U.S.-educated talent that has helped build out the country’s university infrastructure and innovation sector, he said.

With fraught trade talks underway between Beijing and Washington, Hass said that the White House’s revocation announcement could heighten tensions between the two countries. 

“China’s leaders will channel anger about the visa decision toward President Trump and will stoke nationalism in the process,” Hass said. “This will push any negotiated outcome on Trump’s priorities further away, rather than pulling the decision horizon closer.”

[vague-humanoid]

The ongoing harms of AI

In the early days of the chatbot hype, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman was making a lot of promises about what large language models (LLMs) would mean for the future of human society. In Altman’s vision, our doctors and teachers would become chatbots and eventually everyone would have their own tailored AI assistant to help with whatever they needed. It wasn’t hard to see what that could mean for people’s jobs, if his predictions were true. The problem for Altman is that those claims were pure fantasy.

Over the 20 months that have passed since, it’s become undeniably clear that LLMs have limitations many companies do not want to acknowledge, as that might torpedo the hype keeping their executives relevant and their corporate valuations sky high. The problem of false information, often deceptively termed “hallucinations,” cannot be effectively tackled and the notion that the technologies will continue getting infinitely better with more and more data has been called into question by the minimal improvements new AI models have been able to deliver.

However, once the AI bubble bursts, that doesn’t mean chatbots and image generators will be relegated to the trash bin of history. Rather, there will be a reassessment of where it makes sense to implement them, and if attention moves on too fast, they may be able to do that with minimal pushback. The challenge visual artists and video game workers are already finding with employers making use of generative AI to worsen the labor conditions in their industries may become entrenched, especially if artists fail in their lawsuits against AI companies for training on their work without permission. But it could be far worse than that.

Microsoft is already partnering with Palantir to feed generative AI into militaries and intelligence agencies, while governments around the world are looking at how they can implement generative AI to reduce the cost of service delivery, often without effective consideration of the potential harms that can come of relying on tools that are well known to output false information. This is a problem Resisting AI author Dan McQuillan has pointed to as a key reason why we must push back against these technologies. There are already countless examples of algorithmic systems have been used to harm welfare recipients, childcare benefit applicants, immigrants, and other vulnerable groups. We risk a repetition, if not an intensification, of those harmful outcomes.

When the AI bubble bursts, investors will lose money, companies will close, and workers will lose jobs. Those developments will be splashed across the front pages of major media organizations and will receive countless hours of public discussion. But it’s those lasting harms that will be harder to immediately recognize, and that could fade as the focus moves on to whatever Silicon Valley places starts pushing as the foundation of its next investment cycle.

All the benefits Altman and his fellow AI boosters promised will fade, just as did the promises of the gig economy, the metaverse, the crypto industry, and countless others. But the harmful uses of the technology will stick around, unless concerted action is taken to stop those use cases from lingering long after the bubble bursts.

[raffaeleitlodeo]

I CONTI DELLA SERVA. Ieri Trump ha fatto sapere di aver avvertito l’Unione che i paesi europei che hanno avanzo attivo nella bilancia dei pagamenti (cioè che esportano in US più di quanto importano) dovranno pareggiare i conti acquistando più petrolio e gas americano, altrimenti “saranno dazi senza fine!”.

Solo nell’automotive, dazi pesanti sarebbero -25.000 posti di lavoro, per lo più tedeschi ed italiani. Vediamo un po’ la faccenda in soldoni.

La bilancia dei pagamenti Italia-US è attiva per 42 MLD €. La nostra bolletta energetica è di 66 MLD €. Dovremmo quindi stornare 2/3 dei nostri acquisti energetici dai ns fornitori abituali (tra cui il 25% dalla Russia) in favore degli americani. Da vedere però le tariffe applicate dagli americani, tra cui l’oneroso trasporto, ma soprattutto il costo dello shale gas che è parecchio fiori mercato rispetto a gas e petrolio afro-arabo-russo.

Se l’eventuale riorientamento delle forniture sarebbe un terremoto geopolitico e delle relazioni internazionali (operazioni Eni in Libia, Nigeria etc.), il costo sarebbe probabilmente un significativo ammanco di bilancio (spesa su Pil), una importazione netta di inflazione ed un aumento dei costi di produzione (per via del costo energetico) con effetti ultimi di aumento generalizzato dei prezzi e diminuzione delle esportazioni. In pratica, il suicidio non assistito dell’economia nazionale.

Forse potremmo mitigare un po’ la faccenda aumentando l’import dagli US di beni non energetici. Ma questo significherebbe infarcirci di roba per noi non immediatamente utile o fuori mercato. Comunque è da vedere se la condizioni le possiamo trattare o le decide Trump e basta.

Poco tempo fa, il nuovo segretario NATO Rutte, ha fatto sapere che il 2% di Pil in spese militari non è più il traguardo da raggiungere, ma il 3% o forse di più. Ieri Financial Times ha detto di saper per certo che Trump chiederà addirittura il 5%! Noi spendiamo circa 32 MLD € cioè il 1,42% del Pil. Arrivare al 3% significa raddoppiare la spesa ovvero altri 32 MLD €, un altro ammanco deciso del bilancio nazionale.

Che ci frega se abbiamo una delle popolazioni più anziane del mondo e medici ed infermieri scappano dai pronto soccorso perché non più in grado di operare umanamente il servizio? Ci faremo ricoverare in fureria.

A questo punto o Bruxelles manda in soffitta tutte le norme che governano le economie dell’area euro (rapporto debiti/Pil) o dovremo andare a tagliare la spesa pubblica (aumentare le tasse per carità, magari ai redditi più alti non se ne parla nemmeno). Il tutto per infarcirci di sistema d’arma per lo più americani. Forse una parte di questi nuovi acquisti potranno scalare i 42 MLD € di disavanzo attivo commerciale.

Trump realizzerebbe così diversi goal.

Il primo sarebbe che i vecchi patti ipotizzati da Obama anni fa quali il TTIP che doveva legare in una matassa commerciale US ed europei, sarebbero superati da questo ordine di importazioni coatte dove il guadagno è tutto da una parte. Pollo al cloro? Oh yes!

Il secondo è che forzando la vendita di energia americana oltre a rinforzare non più il legame ma la dipendenza geopolitica EU-US, beneficerebbe i principali sponsor della sua presidenza che sono -da sempre- i big dell’energia fossile.

Il terzo sarebbe la totale distruzione dell’economia europea a vari livelli, gli europei pagherebbero la svolta multipolare e l’espansione commerciale e produttiva cinese (e non solo) nel mondo che va a detrimento delle posizioni americane.

Infine, quarto, ci ritroveremmo gonfi di armi la cui gran parte è in elettronica ovvero US e quindi saldati una volta di più al polo US che deciderà dove, come e quando mandarci a far guerra di qui e di là secondo proprie intenzioni e benefici.

Tutto ciò verrà gestito dalla signora in immagine, affascinata da Milei e Musk, con i sodali della Lega e di Forza Italia per i quali tasse ai più capienti, politiche redistributive e di spessa sociale sono anatema. Non sono più di destra come molti dicono (categorie superate!), ci assomigliano solo.

Arrivati qui mi verrebbe voglia di intingere il pennino nel veleno e scrivere una notarella sui teorici del sovranismo e del populismo che forse negli ultimi anni non hanno ben capito che in mondo siamo capitati, i “non c’è più destra e sinistra”, quelli che si son bagnati vedendo eletto il "miliardario del popolo" alle ultime elezioni americane, coloro che passano il loro tempo ancora a volgere le loro ossessioni contro il genderismo, il green deal ed altre ininfluenti questioni di ininfluente guerriglia culturale, ma mi asterrò.

Del resto, se costoro non capiscono la lingua che parla la realtà concreta figurati quanto gliene importa di una nota di Fagan.

Auguri a Voi e famiglia!

NOTA. I conti si riferiscono al bilancio statale, cioè all'Italia e quindi "i conti della serva" del titolo, sono i conti dell'Italia. Ogni altra attribuzione dell'epiteto "serva" ad altro soggetto non era nelle intenzioni dell'autore del post. Pierluigi Fagan, Facebook

[tieflingkisser]

Google removes pledge to not use AI for weapons from website

Google removed a pledge to not build AI for weapons or surveillance from its website this week. The change was first spotted by Bloomberg. The company appears to have updated its public AI principles page, erasing a section titled “applications we will not pursue,” which was still included as recently as last week. Asked for comment, the company pointed TechCrunch to a new blog post on “responsible AI.” It notes, in part, “we believe that companies, governments, and organizations sharing these values should work together to create AI that protects people, promotes global growth, and supports national security.” Google’s newly updated AI principles note the company will work to “mitigate unintended or harmful outcomes and avoid unfair bias,” as well as align the company with “widely accepted principles of international law and human rights.” In recent years, Google’s contracts to provide the U.S. and Israeli militaries with cloud services have sparked internal protests from employees. The company has maintained that its AI is not used to harm humans; however, the Pentagon’s AI chief recently told TechCrunch that some company’s AI models are speeding up the U.S. military’s kill chain.

[weemietime]

How do you feel about the IDF systematically murdering Palestinians?

I feel that in order to make such a claim one must produce evidence that it is a systematic policy. It comes across as a little incoherent when we have countries like Ireland petitioning the ICJ to broaden the interpretation of the criteria of the Genocide Convention, and Amnesty International concluding that they are using a definition outside the scope of the Genocide Convention. Systematic by definition means that there is a policy and an intention to murder Palestinians for being Palestinian.

Amnesty International has already produced a pamphlet including quotes from Israeli officials as an attempt to claim they are all genocidal when the quotes themselves such as the Amalak one, the very next sentence clearly says Hamas and not Palestinian civilians. Or we have direct quotes from people saying "we have no issue with Palestinians, only Hamas."

I think our legal system must operate with a single standard applied equally for the laws, and we have a clear cut example that this isn't happening. The USA funded Rwanda, too and there are no protests for Rwanda to stop being a country. Putin killed 500,000 and levels cities to rubble and he has a seat on the UNSC and most people don't conclude Putin is committing genocide.

The US military killed over a million civilians in Iraq and Chelsea Manning produced evidence of videos and calls where soldiers are indiscriminately targeting civilians and children and yet no one has concluded they committed genocide there. My "feeling" is that feelings are insufficient evidence of criminal activity.

And again, this isn't suggesting that such data doesn't exist or that we won't find it. And if we do, then I will adapt my language to reflect this. Its saying that the data we have now is insufficient. We don't say "that guy is a murderer" and throw him in prison without evidence. That's not how human courts of law work.

I think that we do have evidence that Netanyahu is committing crimes and I support his arrest warrant and likewise support arresting Likud officials and trying them for their crimes as a whole. And I support expanding the definition of genocide to add that genocide can happen opportunistically, whilst in service of other goals. Basically as the Genocide Convention is now, the crime of genocide cannot be applicable to any parties engaged in mutual combat. So in order to properly convict Israel for genocide, the Genocide Convention would need to be changed to include these new parameters. And I support that, and I think it will pave the way to convict all the other genocidal idiots around the world, too.

Here is some more data on Ireland's actions from an international lawyer, however I disagree with him saying that AI And Ireland and South Africa aren't asking the ICJ to expand the definition of genocide because that is fundamentally what is happening, when you put all those pieces together, that means the definition of genocide will be changed.

Whether or not it should be changed is a separate argument. Personally? I'm in favor of expanding it, actually. I would actually be OK if the ICJ retroactively said yeah these things are genocidal and started going after all the genocidal countries. I feel that anyone who targets a civilian ought to be thrown in prison and separated from the rest of us, for our own safety, from them.

And the articles, and here.

Another.

Here is an article I found on my own that expands on the claim of "widescale interference" with aid, and indiscriminate targeting, destruction of civilian entities, etc. This is satellite imagery that we have.

[probablyasocialecologist]

The Israeli army’s expanded authorization for bombing non-military targets, the loosening of constraints regarding expected civilian casualties, and the use of an artificial intelligence system to generate more potential targets than ever before, appear to have contributed to the destructive nature of the initial stages of Israel’s current war on the Gaza Strip, an investigation by +972 Magazine and Local Call reveals. These factors, as described by current and former Israeli intelligence members, have likely played a role in producing what has been one of the deadliest military campaigns against Palestinians since the Nakba of 1948. The investigation by +972 and Local Call is based on conversations with seven current and former members of Israel’s intelligence community — including military intelligence and air force personnel who were involved in Israeli operations in the besieged Strip — in addition to Palestinian testimonies, data, and documentation from the Gaza Strip, and official statements by the IDF Spokesperson and other Israeli state institutions. Compared to previous Israeli assaults on Gaza, the current war — which Israel has named “Operation Iron Swords,” and which began in the wake of the Hamas-led assault on southern Israel on October 7 — has seen the army significantly expand its bombing of targets that are not distinctly military in nature. These include private residences as well as public buildings, infrastructure, and high-rise blocks, which sources say the army defines as “power targets” (“matarot otzem”). The bombing of power targets, according to intelligence sources who had first-hand experience with its application in Gaza in the past, is mainly intended to harm Palestinian civil society: to “create a shock” that, among other things, will reverberate powerfully and “lead civilians to put pressure on Hamas,” as one source put it. Several of the sources, who spoke to +972 and Local Call on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the Israeli army has files on the vast majority of potential targets in Gaza — including homes — which stipulate the number of civilians who are likely to be killed in an attack on a particular target. This number is calculated and known in advance to the army’s intelligence units, who also know shortly before carrying out an attack roughly how many civilians are certain to be killed.

[mithliya]

this article is so illuminating and shows why so many of us believe this is a genocide-- according to the own words of IDF soldiers and israeli govt and their actions. they are admitting repeatedly that they sometimes target civilian areas and civilians and cultural heritage sites intentionally, knowing hamas is not there, in a twisted attempt of turning creating civil pressure on hamas.

Compared to previous Israeli assaults on Gaza, the current war — which Israel has named “Operation Iron Swords,” and which began in the wake of the Hamas-led assault on southern Israel on October 7 — has seen the army significantly expand its bombing of targets that are not distinctly military in nature. These include private residences as well as public buildings, infrastructure, and high-rise blocks, which sources say the army defines as “power targets” (“matarot otzem”). The bombing of power targets, according to intelligence sources who had first-hand experience with its application in Gaza in the past, is mainly intended to harm Palestinian civil society: to “create a shock” that, among other things, will reverberate powerfully and “lead civilians to put pressure on Hamas,” as one source put it.

theyre literally intentionally terrorising and killing palestinian civilians hoping it will somehow cause palestinians to somehow do the job of getting hamas for israel. instead of actually just.......idk.......trying to get hamas.

Several of the sources, who spoke to +972 and Local Call on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the Israeli army has files on the vast majority of potential targets in Gaza — including homes — which stipulate the number of civilians who are likely to be killed in an attack on a particular target. This number is calculated and known in advance to the army’s intelligence units, who also know shortly before carrying out an attack roughly how many civilians are certain to be killed. In one case discussed by the sources, the Israeli military command knowingly approved the killing of hundreds of Palestinian civilians in an attempt to assassinate a single top Hamas military commander. “The numbers increased from dozens of civilian deaths [permitted] as collateral damage as part of an attack on a senior official in previous operations, to hundreds of civilian deaths as collateral damage,” said one source. “Nothing happens by accident,” said another source. “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

the usage of "we are not hamas" to say that they are intentionally choosing to kill civilians instead of doing so at random is.. insane. "we are not hamas" should be followed by being more humane, not.. "we decided killing hundreds of palestinian civilians is worth it to get 1 single hamas member!"

According to the sources, the increasing use of AI-based systems like Habsora allows the army to carry out strikes on residential homes where a single Hamas member lives on a massive scale, even those who are junior Hamas operatives. Yet testimonies of Palestinians in Gaza suggest that since October 7, the army has also attacked many private residences where there was no known or apparent member of Hamas or any other militant group residing. Such strikes, sources confirmed to +972 and Local Call, can knowingly kill entire families in the process.

so, unshockingly, they are sometimes killing everyone within a building over some potential 1 hamas member, and sometimes there isnt a singular hamas member known in that building. so it could just be purely civilians being killed.

Another source said that a senior intelligence officer told his officers after October 7 that the goal was to “kill as many Hamas operatives as possible,” for which the criteria around harming Palestinian civilians were significantly relaxed. As such, there are “cases in which we shell based on a wide cellular pinpointing of where the target is, killing civilians. This is often done to save time, instead of doing a little more work to get a more accurate pinpointing,” said the source.

so they can be more accurate and precise with their attacks, as should be obvious for a highly sophisticated military, but they decide its better to just kill thousands of civilians if it saves them time.

From the first moment after the October 7 attack, decisionmakers in Israel openly declared that the response would be of a completely different magnitude to previous military operations in Gaza, with the stated aim of totally eradicating Hamas. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” said IDF Spokesperson Daniel Hagari on Oct. 9. The army swiftly translated those declarations into actions.

The third is “power targets,” which includes high-rises and residential towers in the heart of cities, and public buildings such as universities, banks, and government offices. The idea behind hitting such targets, say three intelligence sources who were involved in planning or conducting strikes on power targets in the past, is that a deliberate attack on Palestinian society will exert “civil pressure” on Hamas.

they are deliberately destroying palestinian culture and history and society, hoping it will somehow create more pressure on hamas. 0 regard for palestinians' well-beings and safety and existence and they keep saying this over & over again

The final category consists of “family homes” or “operatives’ homes.” The stated purpose of these attacks is to destroy private residences in order to assassinate a single resident suspected of being a Hamas or Islamic Jihad operative. However, in the current war, Palestinian testimonies assert that some of the families that were killed did not include any operatives from these organizations. In the early stages of the current war, the Israeli army appears to have given particular attention to the third and fourth categories of targets. According to statements on Oct. 11 by the IDF Spokesperson, during the first five days of fighting, half of the targets bombed — 1,329 out of a total 2,687 — were deemed power targets.

so half of their targets were specifically intended to terrorise palestinian civilians and weren't actually attacks on hamas.

“We are asked to look for high-rise buildings with half a floor that can be attributed to Hamas,” said one source who took part in previous Israeli offensives in Gaza. “Sometimes it is a militant group’s spokesperson’s office, or a point where operatives meet. I understood that the floor is an excuse that allows the army to cause a lot of destruction in Gaza. That is what they told us. “If they would tell the whole world that the [Islamic Jihad] offices on the 10th floor are not important as a target, but that its existence is a justification to bring down the entire high-rise with the aim of pressuring civilian families who live in it in order to put pressure on terrorist organizations, this would itself be seen as terrorism. So they do not say it,” the source added.

the goal of their destruction of residential buildings isn't even about getting a hamas member who may or may not be there, its terrorism against palestinians.

Various sources who served in IDF intelligence units said that at least until the current war, army protocols allowed for attacking power targets only when the buildings were empty of residents at the time of the strike. However, testimonies and videos from Gaza suggest that since October 7, some of these targets have been attacked without prior notice being given to their occupants, killing entire families as a result.

unshockingly its as palestinians in gaza have been saying: they get attacked with no warning and countless civilian deaths occur as a result.

According to the Israeli army, during the first five days of fighting it dropped 6,000 bombs on the Strip, with a total weight of about 4,000 tons. Media outlets reported that the army had wiped out entire neighborhoods; according to the Gaza-based Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, these attacks led to “the complete destruction of residential neighborhoods, the destruction of infrastructure, and the mass killing of residents.”   As documented by Al Mezan and numerous images coming out of Gaza, Israel bombed the Islamic University of Gaza, the Palestinian Bar Association, a UN building for an educational program for outstanding students, a building belonging to the Palestine Telecommunications Company, the Ministry of National Economy, the Ministry of Culture, roads, and dozens of high-rise buildings and homes — especially in Gaza’s northern neighborhoods.

Yet despite the unbridled Israeli bombardment, the damage to Hamas’ military infrastructure in northern Gaza during the first days of the war appears to have been very minimal. Indeed, intelligence sources told +972 and Local Call that military targets that were part of power targets have previously been used many times as a fig leaf for harming the civilian population. “Hamas is everywhere in Gaza; there is no building that does not have something of Hamas in it, so if you want to find a way to turn a high-rise into a target, you will be able to do so,” said one former intelligence official.

they admit they use the excuse of hamas to justify attacking overwhelmingly civilian areas.

Indeed, according to sources who were involved in the compiling of power targets in previous wars, although the target file usually contains some kind of alleged association with Hamas or other militant groups, striking the target functions primarily as a “means that allows damage to civil society.” The sources understood, some explicitly and some implicitly, that damage to civilians is the real purpose of these attacks.

According to the doctrine — developed by former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot, who is now a Knesset member and part of the current war cabinet — in a war against guerrilla groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah, Israel must use disproportionate and overwhelming force while targeting civilian and government infrastructure in order to establish deterrence and force the civilian population to pressure the groups to end their attacks. The concept of “power targets” seems to have emanated from this same logic. The first time the Israeli army publicly defined power targets in Gaza was at the end of Operation Protective Edge in 2014. The army bombed four buildings during the last four days of the war — three residential multi-story buildings in Gaza City, and a high-rise in Rafah. The security establishment explained at the time that the attacks were intended to convey to the Palestinians of Gaza that “nothing is immune anymore,” and to put pressure on Hamas to agree to a ceasefire. “The evidence we collected shows that the massive destruction [of the buildings] was carried out deliberately, and without any military justification,” stated an Amnesty report in late 2014.

Not only has the current war seen Israel attack an unprecedented number of power targets, it has also seen the army abandon prior policies that aimed at avoiding harm to civilians. Whereas previously the army’s official procedure was that it was possible to attack power targets only after all civilians had been evacuated from them, testimonies from Palestinian residents in Gaza indicate that, since October 7, Israel has attacked high-rises with their residents still inside, or without having taken significant steps to evacuate them, leading to many civilian deaths. Such attacks very often result in the killing of entire families, as experienced in previous offensives; according to an investigation by AP conducted after the 2014 war, about 89 percent of those killed in the aerial bombings of family homes were unarmed residents, and most of them were children and women.

However, evidence from Gaza suggests that some high-rises — which we assume to have been power targets — were toppled without prior warning. +972 and Local Call located at least two cases during the current war in which entire residential high-rises were bombed and collapsed without warning, and one case in which, according to the evidence, a high-rise building collapsed on civilians who were inside.

therefore palestinian civilians are being killed without even being given warnings, just for the sake of terrorising other palestinians and hopefully pressuring hamas.

Six days later, on Oct. 31, the eight-story Al-Mohandseen residential building was bombed without warning. Between 30 and 45 bodies were reportedly recovered from the ruins on the first day. One baby was found alive, without his parents. Journalists estimated that over 150 people were killed in the attack, as many remained buried under the rubble. The building used to stand in Nuseirat Refugee Camp, south of Wadi Gaza — in the supposed “safe zone” to which Israel directed the Palestinians who fled their homes in northern and central Gaza — and therefore served as temporary shelter for the displaced, according to testimonies.

so theyre also attacking "safe zones".

According to an investigation by Amnesty International, on Oct. 9, Israel shelled at least three multi-story buildings, as well as an open flea market on a crowded street in the Jabaliya Refugee Camp, killing at least 69 people. “The bodies were burned … I didn’t want to look, I was scared of looking at Imad’s face,” said the father of a child who was killed. “The bodies were scattered on the floor. Everyone was looking for their children in these piles. I recognized my son only by his trousers. I wanted to bury him immediately, so I carried my son and got him out.” According to Amnesty’s investigation, the army said that the attack on the market area was aimed at a mosque “where there were Hamas operatives.” However, according to the same investigation, satellite images do not show a mosque in the vicinity.

independent investigations are finding inconsistencies between IDF claims and reality.

According to the IDF Spokesperson, by Nov. 10, during the first 35 days of fighting, Israel attacked a total of 15,000 targets in Gaza. Based on multiple sources, this is a very high figure compared to the four previous major operations in the Strip. During Guardian of the Walls in 2021, Israel attacked 1,500 targets in 11 days. In Protective Edge in 2014, which lasted 51 days, Israel struck between 5,266 and 6,231 targets. During Pillar of Defense in 2012, about 1,500 targets were attacked over eight days. In Cast Lead” in 2008, Israel struck 3,400 targets in 22 days. Intelligence sources who served in the previous operations also told +972 and Local Call that, for 10 days in 2021 and three weeks in 2014, an attack rate of 100 to 200 targets per day led to a situation in which the Israeli Air Force had no targets of military value left. Why, then, after nearly two months, has the Israeli army not yet run out of targets in the current war?

Israeli analysts have admitted that the military effectiveness of these kinds of disproportionate aerial attacks is limited. Two weeks after the start of the bombings in Gaza (and before the ground invasion) — after the bodies of 1,903 children, approximately 1,000 women, and 187 elderly men were counted in the Gaza Strip — Israeli commentator Avi Issacharoff tweeted: “As hard as it is to hear, on the 14th day of fighting, it does not appear that the military arm of Hamas has been significantly harmed. The most significant damage to the military leadership is the assassination of [Hamas commander] Ayman Nofal.”

i did not share all of the article so u can feel free to read all of it but it just confirms what many of us know to be the horrific and cruel acts of the IDF.

[beardedmrbean]

Google's parent company lifting a longstanding ban on artificial intelligence (AI) being used for developing weapons and surveillance tools is "incredibly concerning", a leading human rights group has said.

Alphabet has rewritten its guidelines on how it will use AI, dropping a section which previously ruled out applications that were "likely to cause harm".

Human Rights Watch has criticised the decision, telling the BBC that AI can "complicate accountability" for battlefield decisions that "may have life or death consequences."

In a blog post Google defended the change, arguing that businesses and democratic governments needed to work together on AI that "supports national security".

Experts say AI could be widely deployed on the battlefield - though there are fears about its use too, particularly with regard to autonomous weapons systems.

"For a global industry leader to abandon red lines it set for itself signals a concerning shift, at a time when we need responsible leadership in AI more than ever," said Anna Bacciarelli, senior AI researcher at Human Rights Watch.

The "unilateral" decision showed also showed "why voluntary principles are not an adequate substitute for regulation and binding law" she added.

In its blog, Alphabet, said democracies should lead in AI development, guided by what it called "core values" like freedom, equality and respect for human rights.

"And we believe that companies, governments and organisations sharing these values should work together to create AI that protects people, promotes global growth and supports national security," it added

The blog - written by senior vice president James Manyika and Sir Demis Hassabis, who leads the AI lab Google DeepMind - said the company's original AI principles published in 2018 needed to be updated as the technology had evolved.

'Killing on a vast scale'

Awareness of the military potential of AI has grown in recent years.

In January, MP's argued that the conflict in Ukraine had shown the technology "offers serious military advantage on the battlefield"

As AI becomes more widespread and sophisticated it would "change the way defence works, from the back office to the frontline," Emma Lewell-Buck MP, who chaired a recent commons report into the UK military's use of AI, wrote.

But as well as debate among AI experts and professionals over how the powerful new technology should be governed in broad terms, there is also controversy around the use of AI on the battlefield and in surveillance technologies.

Concern is greatest over the potential for AI-powered weapons capable of taking lethal action autonomously, with campaigners arguing controls are urgently needed.

The Doomsday Clock - which symbolises how near humanity is to destruction - cited that concern in its latest assessment of the dangers mankind faces.

"Systems that incorporate artificial intelligence in military targeting have been used in Ukraine and the Middle East, and several countries are moving to integrate artificial intelligence into their militaries", it said.

"Such efforts raise questions about the extent to which machines will be allowed to make military decisions—even decisions that could kill on a vast scale", it added.

'Don't be evil'

Originally, long before the current surge of interest in the ethics of AI, Google's founders, Sergei Brin and Larry Page, said their motto for the firm was "don't be evil".

When the company was restructured under the name Alphabet Inc in 2015 the parent company switched to "Do the right thing".

Since then Google staff have sometimes pushed back against the approach taken by their executives.

In 2018, the firm did not renew a contract for AI work with the US Pentagon following resignations and a petition signed by thousands of employees.

They feared "Project Maven" was the first step towards using artificial intelligence for lethal purposes.

The blog was published just ahead of Alphabet's end of year financial report, showing results that were weaker than market expectations, and knocking back its share price.

That was despite a 10% rise in revenue from digital advertising, its biggest earner, boosted by US election spending.

In its earnings report the company said it would spend $75bn ($60bn) on AI projects this year, 29% more than Wall Street analysts had expected.

The company is investing in the infrastructure to run AI, AI research, and applications such as AI-powered search.