The people who Study Nuclear war Because living is sure that artificial intelligence will soon operate the deadly weapons. None of them are quite sure what, that’s exactly what it means.
In mid -July, Nobel laureates gathered at the University of Chicago to listen to experts about nuclear war to talk about the end of the world. In closed sessions more than two days, scientists, former government officials and retired military illuminated the awards for the most devastating weapons ever created. The goal was to educate some of the most respected people in the world about one of the most terrible weapons ever made and, finally, the winners make political recommendations to world leaders on how to avoid nuclear war.
AI was in everyone’s mind. “We enter a new world of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies affecting our daily lives, but also influence the nuclear world we live in,” Scott SaganStanford professor known for his nuclear disarmament research, said during a press conference at the end of the talks.
It is a statement that considers the inevitability of governments mixing AI and nuclear weapons – something I spoke in Chicago believed.
“It’s like electricity,” says Bob LatiffRetired US Air Force Major General and Member of the Bulletin of the Scientific and Security Board of the Atomic Scientists. “It will find its way in everything.” Latiff is one of the people who helps set the Doomsday clock every year.
“The conversation about AI and Nukes is hindered by some major problems. The first is that no one really knows what AI is,” says Jon Wolfsthal, a nonproleal expert, who is the director of a global risk at the Federation of US scientists and was formerly a special assistant to Barack Obama.
“What does ai -control of a nuclear weapon mean? What does it mean to give [computer chip] Nuclear weapon control? “asks Grass himStanford professor and Doomsday Clock -Alumina. “Part of the problem is that big language models have taken over the debate.”
First, the good news. No one thinks chatgpt or grok will get nuclear codes anytime soon. Wolfsthal tells me that there are many “theological” differences between nuclear experts, but that they are joined on that front. “In this kingdom, almost everyone says we want effective human control over a nuclear weapon decision,” he says.
However, Wolfsthal heard whispers about others about the uses of LLMs in the heart of American power. “Many people said, ‘Well, look, I just want to have an interactive computer available for the president so he can see what Putin or Xi will do and I can produce that database very reliably. I can get everything Xi or Putin once said and wrote about anything and have a statistically high probability of reflecting what Putin said,” he says.
