Meta Permits Its AI Models To Be Used For US Military Purposes (nytimes.com)
- Reference: 0175404273
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/11/05/043209/meta-permits-its-ai-models-to-be-used-for-us-military-purposes
- Source link: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/04/technology/meta-ai-military.html
> Meta will [1]allow U.S. government agencies and contractors working on national security to use its artificial intelligence models for military purposes, the company said on Monday, in a shift from its policy that prohibited the use of its technology for such efforts. Meta said that it would make its A.I. models, called Llama, available to federal agencies and that it was working with defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Booz Allen as well as defense-focused tech companies including Palantir and Anduril. The Llama models are "open source," which means the technology can be freely copied and distributed by other developers, companies and governments.
>
> Meta's move is an exception to its "acceptable use policy," which forbade the use of the company's A.I. software for "military, warfare, nuclear industries," among other purposes. In a [2]blog post on Monday, Nick Clegg, Meta's president of global affairs, said the company now backed "responsible and ethical uses" of the technology that supported the United States and "democratic values" in a global race for A.I. supremacy. "Meta wants to play its part to support the safety, security and economic prosperity of America -- and of its closest allies too," Mr. Clegg wrote. He added that "widespread adoption of American open source A.I. models serves both economic and security interests."
The company said it would also share its technology with members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance: Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand in addition to the United States.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/04/technology/meta-ai-military.html
[2] https://about.fb.com/news/2024/11/open-source-ai-america-global-security/
The Five Eyes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks like someone let loose a little too much there.
When people hear "US Military use" they think of carpet bombing brown people in the desert.
When people hear "The Five Eyes Alliance" they think of subversive government trying to curtail the freedoms and privacy of those they are supposed to serve.
Guess we know what Meta has in store then. Fuckerburg just sold out everyone to the traditional panopticon.
Re: (Score:3)
> Guess we know what Meta has in store then. Fuckerburg just sold out everyone to the traditional panopticon.
Facebook was already known to be a member of PRISM like Apple and Microsoft, so we already knew they were part of the panopticon. This is only confirmation, not news. Facebook was absolutely never going to restrict these models from military use.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a big difference from the panopticon of digital price fixing and cyberstalking VS. the panopticon of drones (human or artificial) with guns. One will keep you alive to milk you for all your worth, the other will gladly kill you for nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
>> Facebook was already known to be a member of PRISM
> There's a big difference from the panopticon of digital price fixing and cyberstalking VS. the panopticon of drones (human or artificial) with guns.
Tell us you don't know [1]enough to participate in this conversation [wikipedia.org] without telling us.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM
Zuckerberg acting against privacy? I'm shocked! (Score:2)
"Meta will allow U.S. government agencies and contractors working on national security to use its artificial intelligence models for military purposes, the company said on Monday..."
Like Zuckerberg could stop them even if he wanted to...and he doesn't want to. I wonder what kind of deal he cut.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm confused. How does military use of AI models relate to privacy?
Re: Zuckerberg acting against privacy? I'm shocked (Score:1)
That's a nasty case of myopia you have there.
Cleggy still working at facebook? (Score:2)
Good for him I guess.
Grand Fenwick (Score:3)
How long until they announce that the US is under attack by the Duchy of Grand Fenwick (see the Mouse that Roared).
Re: (Score:2)
We've always been at war with Eurasia.
Par for the course (Score:2)
"We have principles, a moral code that we will never, ever break.
Unless we can make more money."
Companies have policies that hold high moral standards to that which they are not currently doing. The second those moral standards are in conflict with profit, their moral standards are suddenly surprisingly flexible.
The "stock price above all" switch that took over in the 1980s effectively banned morality for publicly held corporations, if you don't do the profitable thing now, no matter how morally repugnant,
Re: (Score:3)
> all this blather and hand wringing over arming our own militaries which quite literally protect us all from death, destruction, and the madness that exists in the rest of the planet
Our military is fostering the death, destruction, and madness that exists in the rest of the planet. We have supported coups, assassinated leaders, founded colonies and armed them so they can commit genocide...
Naive (Score:1)
The idea that we're not going to use such tech for "military, warfare, or nuclear" purposes is naive and stupid virtue signalling.
Do we insist window manufacturers certify "our windows aren't used in military buildings" or plumbers "we don't allow soldiers to shit in our hardware"?
I'd be delighted if there was somehow a way to prevent people who moralistically take a 'stance' against the military & police would somehow be able to be divorced from the benefits of either. But for now, they are free-rider
No way to restrict it (Score:3)
Meta executives told Reuters that "the Chinese government was not authorized to use Llama for military purposes".
But if anyone can get their hands on Llama and do whatever they like, I don't think a niggling license issue is going to be an impediment. So it isn't surprising that Meta would accept the inevitable and just go ahead and give the US and its allies explicit permission.
list primary targets (Score:2)
list primary targets
What is a military purpose? (Score:3)
The US military does a lot of things. Some of them are benign, others not so much.
Hallucinated Intelligence (Score:3)
Man, having an AI dream up a fake threat could have very exciting consequences for the poor sods living in the vicinity thereof.
Re: (Score:2)
Humans have no problems thinking up false threats. Alien Invasion to Russian Election Interference to claims of Manchurian Candidates, all were thought up by humans with a tiny bit of political power. Slights perceived or real. And laying the majority of war at the feet of religion, AI making up stuff is 12th on the threat rundown.
Pork (Score:2)
It's what's for dinner.
Meta? (Score:1)
How is this possible? Meta is well known for a rock solid foundation of ethics and wisdom, setting an example for good in the world. I just don't know what to believe anymore.
So... ban trading with them? (Score:2)
If Huawei cannot get those chips.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, I'm not sure of what Meta brings to the table here vs. alternatives. [1]With Molmo [allenai.org], for example, you can ask it to point to specific things in provided images, for, say, autonomous drone navigation and targeting. LLaMA only just added basic multmodal models.
[1] https://molmo.allenai.org/
Re: (Score:2)
Modern combat involves very little trench warfare--the kind of warfare that requires people with "legs." Most of today's warfare involves information gathering and processing, and remote operation of various types of drones. There are certainly a lot of potential applications for AI models in this type of warfare.