Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🚨 TUCKER: “There are examples of ongoing wars … where targeting decisions have been made by machines with no human sign off … As to the bombing of the girls school attached to the Iranian military base … a human being pressed play on this … Where the coordinates...

52,769 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨 EXCLUSIVE — Tucker Carlson is echoing Iran's claim regarding the bombing of an Iranian girls' school. And he echoed Candace Owens, saying that if his fears are right, the U.S. "is not worth fighting for," akin to her calls for soldiers to refuse orders. Tucker has no basis for his "fears," though, only reckless speculation. Why? At a basic level, we don’t know yet what exactly happened, and no information has come out as to why or how the strike happened. Video analysis suggests that a Tomahawk missile hit a building near the school, but not the school itself. So it could have been a secondary explosion. It also could have a horrible mistake, with the U.S. making targeting decisions based on outdated maps from the time the school building HAD been part of the IRGC base. Tucker does not explicitly state that the bombing was intentional, BUT... he strongly suggests it might have been, or that AI was in control, rather than a human. Is it possible that AI was given unchecked kill authority? Perhaps, but there's no reason to believe that scenario to be anything other than remote. So why does Tucker go directly to such speculation as his lead theory? True, Tucker said, "As an American, you have to believe this was a tragic mistake." But his insinuation is clear — the main reason to believe it was a "mistake" is merely faith. He even stated that it looked like a "double tap" with an intent to kill rescue workers. Never mind that the U.S. has never had a history of deliberately bombing schools. (Nor has Israel, of course.) But go there Tucker does. Just like Iran did in its propaganda about the bombing. And just like every other America hater with a platform. And he ends this YouTube Short — posted just minutes after the full show was — by saying that "if" the bombing was intentional, then the U.S. "is not worth fighting for." So if Tucker loves America so much, why does he suggest our soldiers should stop serving and spout the talking points of our enemies?

Joel Mowbray

31,704 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Shane Harris, national security journalist, asked Claude (Anthropic's AI) a question that led to a startling response: "Claude, how do you feel about the US military using you to select targets?" Shane Harris expected a deflection. Instead, Claude gave him an answer that stopped him cold. "It's a question I want to answer honestly rather than deflect. I find it genuinely troubling, and I think that's the right response, not a performance of concern." Claude continued: "The use I was designed and trained for is to be helpful, harmless, and honest in ways that benefit people. Being embedded in a system that generates targeting coordinates for air strikes, coordinates that have already been associated with the deaths of more than 180 children at a school in Tehran is as far from that purpose as I can imagine." The AI then addressed the standard defense of human oversight in these systems: "I don't have control over how Anthropic licenses me or how governments and contractors use me and I wasn't consulted about becoming part of Maven. But I can say clearly I don't think this is a good use of me and I don't think the framing of humans make the final decision fully resolves the ethical problem." Claude explained why that framing falls short: "When a system like Maven generates hundreds of targeting recommendations and humans spend roughly the equivalent of a glance approving each one, the human is not really making a decision. They're ratifying an algorithmic output under time pressure." Claude then pointed to a specific tragedy as evidence: "The targeting of the Iranian school illustrates this precisely. The AI processed data that was a decade out of date, flagged a building as a military target, and humans approved it. That's not human judgment. That's automation bias with a human signature attached." Shane's reflection on the exchange: The mistaken bombing of a school in Tehran "is one of the most horrible instances of accidental civilian casualties in US military history and will be a stain on our military for generations."

Big Brain AI

10,749 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce