[HN Gopher] DARPA open sources resources to aid evaluation of ad...
___________________________________________________________________
DARPA open sources resources to aid evaluation of adversarial AI
defenses
Author : infodocket
Score : 67 points
Date : 2021-12-21 20:09 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.darpa.mil)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.darpa.mil)
| say_it_as_it_is wrote:
| I realize that IBM is the US government's IT department but their
| involvement doesn't instill a great deal of confidence that
| anything this program has created is more than a heavily
| documented dumpster file
| sijdnszlci wrote:
| mrobot wrote:
| A book about IBM and Nazi Germany
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
| voz_ wrote:
| What is your point?
| quantomac wrote:
| My startup works with IBM and they have amazing tech. My
| technology company is in the defense domain and my main interest
| is actually quantum led AI but we have some more solutions for
| the present. With OpenPages by IBM, we can assign governance and
| regulations to our data discovery. I look forward to bringing
| solutions to the US government, and lower level services to other
| nations.
|
| The future of warfare is coming no matter what we do. The US
| should be prepared first. Even now, our AI is containerized and
| can orchestrate itself. I look forward to helping achieve a more
| pleasant and easier to govern planet.
|
| Besides, if you did not do anything wrong, its not like you have
| anything to worry about.
| linschn wrote:
| This reads like AI generated text. I literally can not
| understand what you are trying to say.
| CyanBird wrote:
| It is just general US jingoism and fears of "the other" to
| retroactively try and excuse the expansion of the US military
| and military industrial complex onto "cyberspace " so as to
| avoid criticism for it
| the_optimist wrote:
| It's a copypasta proposal. The point is to cast aspersions
| and socialize a point of view without delivering information.
| Very social media-like.
| tonguez wrote:
| Could you elaborate? The point of it is to asperse what
| exactly? What is the point of view that someone is
| attempting to socialize? That people should not care about
| privacy if they have nothing to hide?
|
| So Big Brother has a bot create a post like this to make
| people think that other people want less privacy? Why
| wouldn't a bot just post something pre-written by an actual
| human instead of some weird collage of robotic-sounding
| sentiments like, "I look forward to bringing solutions to
| the US government"? That is not something a human would
| actually say. It it supposed to look like it was translated
| from another language? Is it just to waste our time trying
| to decipher it?
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| I _think_ (hope?) that it 's sarcasm. The last paragraph is
| the tip-off.
| neatze wrote:
| > Besides, if you did not do anything wrong, its not like you
| have anything to worry about.
|
| Out of curiosity what do you mean specifically by this
| statement ?
| potatoman22 wrote:
| I can't wait for the definition of 'wrong' to change so it
| includes more people :)
| xet7 wrote:
| > Besides, if you did not do anything wrong, its not like you
| have anything to worry about.
|
| AI already makes mistakes, detecting wrong people:
|
| https://www.google.com/search?q=ai+detects+wrong+person
| pokepim wrote:
| Did Edward Snowden do something wrong? Because he is treated by
| the government like he did but he actually helped humanity as a
| whole. Your comment reeks of hardcore military shilling...
| adventured wrote:
| > Did Edward Snowden do something wrong?
|
| Yes and it was still quite likely the correct choice/approach
| (how he went about it) in terms of the overall benefit to
| privacy globally (which seems to have been his aim).
|
| Snowden could have attempted a few other legal approaches to
| being a whistleblower. The risk would have been far higher
| they would have buried him and the information in one form or
| another; they certainly would have tried. And even if he had
| succeeded through that channel, less information would have
| gotten out about what they were doing.
|
| Doing something wrong doesn't always lead to a bad outcome or
| vice versa, there is no inherently fixed link there. Doing
| something right doesn't always lead to a good/positive
| outcome for example, that's one example I think more people
| can very easily relate to; and for the same reason that's
| true, the exact opposite is true.
| CyanBird wrote:
| There's just no way that information about what was (is)
| going on would have come out to the public through normal
| channels, after all the very reason why Snowden did it was
| after senior nsa officials explicitly lied to congress
| about them spying on US citizens
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-21 23:00 UTC)