[HN Gopher] The AI Arms Race Isn't Inevitable
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The AI Arms Race Isn't Inevitable
        
       Author : billybuckwheat
       Score  : 14 points
       Date   : 2024-08-23 20:04 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.palladiummag.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.palladiummag.com)
        
       | talldayo wrote:
       | > Under this narrative, a nation possessing advanced AI
       | capabilities could, theoretically, gain an insurmountable
       | military and economic advantage.
       | 
       | Sounds familiar. At the beginning of World War II, Nazi Germany
       | thought their adoption of encryption was a game-changing
       | application of industry that would provide an insurmountable
       | military and information advantage. What they didn't know was
       | that Poland had already cracked their encryption before the war
       | had even begun. Everyone knows how the rest goes; Nazi Germany
       | goes on emboldened by a broken protocol, and gets their
       | communique leaked at every corner.
       | 
       | It's not hard to see the same veins in think-pieces that advocate
       | for "infrastructure investment" (eg. buy schools NVIDIA) and
       | "public-private partnerships" to incorporate AI everywhere. We
       | see this technology that _seems_ smart but is unproven in action;
       | and our reaction is to entirely rely on it without proving the
       | benefits. Advanced AI capability is just as they say - a
       | narrative, a theory.
       | 
       | > The result resembles a 21st-century Cold War, where escalating
       | tension and mistrust make cooperation increasingly difficult and
       | conflict more likely.
       | 
       | The US has been in a Cold War with China for almost a decade now;
       | our competition over AI is almost as irrelevant as the race to
       | find Dodo Bird fossils. Free trade fucked the US over a long time
       | ago, anyone that's paying attention should have expected this to
       | boil over eventually. AI isn't even a straw on the proverbial
       | camel's back, it's the Nvidia hardware that's a point of
       | contention.
       | 
       | > A more balanced approach is needed--one that acknowledges that
       | legitimate security concerns can be better addressed through
       | international cooperation rather than competition, as they have
       | been in the past.
       | 
       | What's really stretching my imagination, here, is that the threat
       | of nukes is self-evident. The threat of advanced AI is not only
       | theoretically irrelevent with current techniques, but
       | demonstrably harmless. We've had advanced LLMs for _years_ now
       | and nobody has summoned Yaldabaoth with ChatGPT 's secret
       | apocrypha. We're going to be fine.
        
         | Apocryphon wrote:
         | As a corollary, the current chip manufacturing war seems a bit
         | overblown as well. Faster chips for _what_ exactly? Do the
         | current nanometer generations really make all that much a
         | difference when it comes to drones or missiles?
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | I suspect the military need isn't so much "our toys must
           | always be 10% better than anyone else's", but rather a
           | question of logistics, ensuring that Y years from now you
           | will be able to safely source an adequate amount of on-par
           | components.
           | 
           | The former is more-immediate and dramatic, so it gets trotted
           | out when asking for funding.
        
           | talldayo wrote:
           | > Do the current nanometer generations really make all that
           | much a difference when it comes to drones or missiles?
           | 
           | For current-generation weapons; no, not really. I suspect the
           | US wants to stop the export of Nvidia to prevent Russia and
           | China from getting an all-inclusive SDK for computer vision
           | and ML. That makes sense; Nvidia is partnered with Northrop
           | Grumman and the rest of "the complex". Giving competitors
           | parity with your flagship weaponry is a bad foot to start off
           | future battles on.
           | 
           | My best guess (just flying by the seat of my pants) is that
           | the US wants to push their advantageous relationship with key
           | NATO partners like ASML to drive a hard tech advantage in the
           | future. Chips like STM-32s and 8088 clones are already mass-
           | produced without license in China and sold to manufacturers
           | wholesale. America can beat them (on paper) by leveraging the
           | IP they have domestically to create superior alternatives
           | locally, albeit at-cost. In high-margin markets like weaponry
           | I think this will work; but for consumer products it's going
           | to be a doozy to stop relying on unlicensed Chinese
           | components and cheap labor.
           | 
           | History shows this strategy has worked before. Without
           | importing Russian engines, the PRC aerospace industry was
           | utterly crippled for a good few decades. If the US can strand
           | China on low-yield EUV nodes, there's potential to leapfrog
           | Chinese compute capability by an order of magnitude. Both
           | China and the US have committed to more than they're capable
           | of with their domestic fab strategy, time will tell if either
           | of them get anything from it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-23 23:00 UTC)