For one particular example, the military is currently funding a program to research techniques to use AI for automated vulnerability discovery and exploitation. The info is public here: https://aicyberchallenge.com/
bamboo
joined 1 year ago
The military is one of the larger stakeholders in AI advancement, and generally doesn’t care about the environment. There will not be a probe that could stifle future advancement in military applications.
Web 2.0 was the mid-2000s idea that every website and service would be accessible via an http api and that it would allow easy integration. It was ads that killed Web 2.0, as users accessing a site via its api rather than its ad-filled website wouldn’t see any of those ads.
These look like mmWave towers. We have them in my city, they’re more comparable to streetlights (often installed on top of one) than traditional cell towers. They’re mostly used for home internet rather than cellphones.
Remember that time the dot com bubble burst and that was the end of internet commerce? Crazy people thought they could buy and sell goods and services over the internet. Glad we live in saner times now.
At least in the US, the research is fairly isolated from capital markets. The military pours huge amounts of money into research on new tech like this, often over ambitiously and with no real expectation of short term returns. Even if there is a financial bubble burst that shuts down a lot of the commercial operations, universities and military contractors will continue working and publishing papers improving the state of the art until industry decides it’s time to try commercializing it again. It’s the basic pattern that has brought us most of the major tech innovations in the US.
There are millions of people devoting huge amounts of time and energy into improving AI capabilities, publishing paper after paper finding new ways to improve models, training, etc. Perhaps some companies are using AI hype to get free money but that doesn’t discredit the hard work of others.
When I posted that comment I was thinking specifically about Skype, not MS as a whole. I agree MS is well more than large enough that it needs regulation.
Factory overclocking is a marketing term. Overclocking means running a processor above its specified speed, but if it intentionally ships that way from the factory it is by definition operating within specification.
They’re brown citizens though, so the US won’t do anything to help.
As someone who works with and knows several military contractors, I’ve never heard of the US taking ownership of any code written. In fact, most of what they’re paying for is for companies to extend software they’ve already written to better fit the governments use case, such that even if the government owned the new improvements, that code wouldn’t function without the base application that pre-dates a government contract.