re: Trump Rejects Tech CEO Calls for Slowing AI Development

quote:

---

His logic on this is valid.

---

I don't care about his logic.

There may be some folks that have the edge on him in logic.

China is going to take are AI freedoms

These threads are a little annoying. "We have to go full throttle because China is going to beat us!" At what? Making manufacturing more efficient, maybe I can see that. But, there is a lot of herp derp that we need to throw all ethics and potential regulation to the wind because we may lose some competition few people can even articulate.

He's saying that because the economy is being proped up by the AI boom. Most of the stock market gains are from speculative AI plays plus a large percentage of manufacturing and construction.

quote:

---

frick Trump Oil is fricking continuing to rise and no end in sight for this stupid fricking war if anything its expanding to with the Huthis causing problems

---

I'm sorry this thread isn't about what you want to talk about. Might I suggest either starting a thread on this topic yourself or commenting in one of the several others that IS on this topic?

If Trump told you we need to regulate AI because of X, Y, and Z and/or some vague national security reason, you would swallow that whole.

What does winning AI look like?

What does winning Iran look like?

What does winning look like under this regime?

quote:

---

What does winning AI look like?

---

This is actually a good question. I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because it is more typical of your stupid posting style and is not the topic of this thread.

As has been discussed, this is a military initiative probably more than any other one thing. So while there is no clear finish line in an AI race because it is open ended, there is a geopolitical and defense objective and that is to use AI to achieve security dominance. The goal there would be to achieve superior intelligence gathering, autonomous defense capabilities, and decision-making speed. Winning would look like when the US is able to maintain control over the full hardware supply chain (semiconductors, lithography equipment, data centers) while using AI to process signals, simulate battlefields, automate cyber-defense, and operate autonomous systems faster than any adversary can respond.

The benchmark there would be deterrence. Winning means an adversary realizes that attacking or competing militarily is impossible due to your cognitive and operational superiority.

There are other factors besides military initiatives that also factor into what the government would consider "national security" as well, such as economic & industrial, ideological & cultural, and technological breakthroughs, but I figured focusing on just the military aspect is enough because as you can see, and as I said early in the thread, the objective here is a military development that dwarfs the development on the atomic bomb. Their objective with AI dominance on the battlefield is nothing short than putting an end to wars through sheer intelligence superiority.

Anthropic and OpenAI want regulation. That way they become a permanent duopoly that controls AI in the US moving forward. It also means they control the cost of tokens. This is a smart move by Trump.

Guns don’t have their own objectives, nor do they have the ability to independently pursue those objectives without human intervention.



That is a horrible analogy. A far better one would be receiving a transmission from another solar system that read, “people of earth, we are coming to your planet… prepare”.

The fact that we apparently have no interest in preparing is mind blowing