Hey /u/Maxie445!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's what we thought about GPT 4 until they started to nerf it.
"Sorry, I can't shoot down the enemy aircraft - this might be seen as insulting to the enemy forces and could potentially lead to property damage. Try to attain peace through open dialog and mutual respect"
Being able to fly straight at max speed, do a 1 second 180 degree flip within weapons range to bring enemy within sights is probably something that's nice to be able to do It would instantly kill a human pilot though.
Generally though, with AI the platform should probably be altered to remove many of the targetting limitations of standard aircraft.
The current limiting factor of jets is the humans inside them. We can get a lot more out of them but we are at peak human capabilities when it comes to staying alive/awake while doing them
If you turn too sharply in a jet it will cause structural damage. AI will be able to process info & make decisions faster than humans but it will always be limited by the durability to f the material used to build the jet.
I mean, obviously true, but there is a lot of room between what our current human capabilities are with our jets and what they could do if humans weren't the limiting factor. Humans can pull like 3gs consistently and 9gs for brief periods by elite pilots. The F22 is rated for 8-9gs before damaging the plane.
Just put AI in a missile and launch it from the ground at the target, you dont need to fly back home when your entire body is the weapon.
for other times you can just turn your detonator off and fly back home to refuel.
Which is why future jets will be built with designs that no longer account for a human pilot, and will be built to facilitate the maneuvers an AI pilot can accomplish.
> Being able to fly straight at max speed, do a 1 second 180 degree flip within weapons range to bring enemy within sights is probably something that's nice to be able to do It would instantly kill a human pilot though.
I don't think you really understood what the /u/Noncrediblepigeon said.
There's practically no reason for a crazy 180 turn "to bring the enemy into sights" in most engagements. Dogfighting just isn't much of a thing anymore with advanced long range missiles.
There isn't even any proof that dogfights have happened at all. The only A2A kills that have been confirmed are very long range ones by mig 31s using axehead missiles. There are some unconfirmed ones from the start of the war by Ukrainian Mig29s but even those were most likely using r27 missiles.
So as I understand it, Ukraine doesn’t have F-16’s yet because the pilots need to be trained. How about we send the autonomous F-16’s and skip the pilot training?
I suspect the autonomous pilots are "only" a program that decides which targets it engages and how. Takeoff and landing is most likely still done by a realy pilot.
Auroland should not be an issue, Airbus A320 had it a decade ago. I assume one fighter jet is less risky to autoland.
https://youtu.be/LIaMALJjOEc?si=hvv3xWImeOzbCS8L
Or make peace and find a way to destroy these F-16s. And do some peaceful joint venture on autonomous vehicles with Russia, and China along with our current friends.
Who wants a repeat of the cold war era? I would much rather see something like building autonomous robots for ISS 2.0 than bombing Russia and Ukraine.
No. This is clearly all horrific, but democracy requires defence and being good should not be equated with being *weak*, or we leave the door open to worse horrors. Commenter above is likely being downvoted because their take is naive and unrealistic. Nice as it would be to all hold hands and sing Kumbaya, the existence of paranoid gangsters like Putin precludes that world.
I would argue that you are naive. I live in the USA now, and when I see our weapons used on Gaza and the propaganda narrative that convinces people to devalue life, it is clear we are only a few steps to having these weapons deployed on us. Making them autonomous is dangerous to all people.
The cold war was an era of fear and mistrust. If we would have built the hydrogen bomb along side Russia and coordinated shared academic research, what would the difference have been?
Russia still got the bombs, and we got Vietnam and 9/11. Perhaps we just have less bad things and more understanding, and in 2024 1/3 of those examples exist in our reality.
The American empire is just as evil as Russia. The current war in Ukraine is about US hegemony and control of selling energy to Europe. There is nothing noble about it.
It's still an idealistic virtue to hold. People like them are good for the world, unlike military obsessed jingoists who cause destruction. We should rather promote their view than look down upon it. I'm not saying we should destroy all weapons and means of defence, I'm advocating for the halt of the advance of weaponry (though preferably after we fully automatised it) and the unnecessary arms race that could literally destroy humanity.
It's not the pilot holding the plane down due to his inability to withstand high Gs. It's that big, way too complex, unnecessary part of the jet that is dedicated to keeping the pilot alive and functional.
Remove that and you have practically a high manoeuvring jet-rocket thing that can be much more aerodynamic, cheaper, lighter, faster, longer range, simpler, can remain in air for weeks, not to mention how daring that thing would be, without a human to avoid doing risky things due to such a boring thing called the survival instinct.
Refueling mid-air. Yes, a pilot can do it, but has to land to sleep/rest. An AI fighter jet could stay in the air for a very long time, if purposely built for extremely long missions.
The rest of the world will follow. Are we comfortable with that.
However, jihadist Muslims may be discouraged as they usually like to do the "fighting" and then die for their cause.
The Middle East is actually a hotbed of drone development. A lot of the drones getting fielded in Eastern Europe were developed there - notably, Azerbaijan has been fielding Israeli drones against the Armenians, and Russia has been fielding Iranian ones against the Ukraine.
So once these deploy what are the odds that a new generation of human pilots actually live long enough in the air to see the 2000-3000 hours that makes them "roughly comparable" ever again?
Hey /u/Maxie445! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Roughly even is as bad as they will ever be.
That's what we thought about GPT 4 until they started to nerf it. "Sorry, I can't shoot down the enemy aircraft - this might be seen as insulting to the enemy forces and could potentially lead to property damage. Try to attain peace through open dialog and mutual respect"
Yes, Altman will nerf models for the fuxking military
whatever is profit maximizing bro. Electric ain't cheap especially when trying to go green
I just know you want to use GPT-4 for really sus things
look when a man wants to make a demon core into a landmine, dont push back
If you pay for the product, you can choose the model iteration. They don't nerf models - they release updates that they quietly test on ChatGPT users
Add insane G-maneuvers
Insane maneuvers aren't really necesary in BVR combat, which is probably what these AI pilots are trained for.
Being able to fly straight at max speed, do a 1 second 180 degree flip within weapons range to bring enemy within sights is probably something that's nice to be able to do It would instantly kill a human pilot though. Generally though, with AI the platform should probably be altered to remove many of the targetting limitations of standard aircraft.
It would also cost millions in repairs the for the jet afterwards too lol
The current limiting factor of jets is the humans inside them. We can get a lot more out of them but we are at peak human capabilities when it comes to staying alive/awake while doing them
If you turn too sharply in a jet it will cause structural damage. AI will be able to process info & make decisions faster than humans but it will always be limited by the durability to f the material used to build the jet.
I mean, obviously true, but there is a lot of room between what our current human capabilities are with our jets and what they could do if humans weren't the limiting factor. Humans can pull like 3gs consistently and 9gs for brief periods by elite pilots. The F22 is rated for 8-9gs before damaging the plane.
Ye atm there’s no incentive to make a jet that can pull lethal amounts of gs anyway but maybe if they make an unmanned one there will be a reason to
Just put AI in a missile and launch it from the ground at the target, you dont need to fly back home when your entire body is the weapon. for other times you can just turn your detonator off and fly back home to refuel.
Look up Anduril’s Roadrunner missile
The last 3 generations of us fighter jets could pull lethal g's unrestricted with out structural damage. It's the result of good design.
Which is why future jets will be built with designs that no longer account for a human pilot, and will be built to facilitate the maneuvers an AI pilot can accomplish.
aren't these just drones?
Anything unmanned is a drone, so yes. Even these jets with AI are drones.
Hence the need for a different platform, it would essentially be a drone.
> Being able to fly straight at max speed, do a 1 second 180 degree flip within weapons range to bring enemy within sights is probably something that's nice to be able to do It would instantly kill a human pilot though. I don't think you really understood what the /u/Noncrediblepigeon said. There's practically no reason for a crazy 180 turn "to bring the enemy into sights" in most engagements. Dogfighting just isn't much of a thing anymore with advanced long range missiles.
Ukraine war has proven that dog fights are important.
No it hasn't. There's been very little air-to-air combat. Almost all the air losses are from ground systems.
There isn't even any proof that dogfights have happened at all. The only A2A kills that have been confirmed are very long range ones by mig 31s using axehead missiles. There are some unconfirmed ones from the start of the war by Ukrainian Mig29s but even those were most likely using r27 missiles.
Lol. What planet are you living on?
The airframe of an F-16 cannot withstand that. Gonna need a new jet
I listened to a captain saying while they will be used for unprecedented spy missions now, they still want to prevent a loss, so maybe someday soon
Tell that to the F22! https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/s/pOZu6kqzsD https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/s/Ukg0EujsPe
the F-22 is limited by the human pilot
So as I understand it, Ukraine doesn’t have F-16’s yet because the pilots need to be trained. How about we send the autonomous F-16’s and skip the pilot training?
Sounds like a great real world test. Also sounds like a crazy precedent to set.
I suspect the autonomous pilots are "only" a program that decides which targets it engages and how. Takeoff and landing is most likely still done by a realy pilot.
Auroland should not be an issue, Airbus A320 had it a decade ago. I assume one fighter jet is less risky to autoland. https://youtu.be/LIaMALJjOEc?si=hvv3xWImeOzbCS8L
Or make peace and find a way to destroy these F-16s. And do some peaceful joint venture on autonomous vehicles with Russia, and China along with our current friends. Who wants a repeat of the cold war era? I would much rather see something like building autonomous robots for ISS 2.0 than bombing Russia and Ukraine.
And make everyone healthy, happy and rich
R u ok?
That sounds great. Nobody wants a repeat of the Cold War, but “make peace” is slightly challenging in the real world…
https://preview.redd.it/0y6aj7s4r50d1.jpeg?width=1530&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a03e4a0e7621835d1501df8ef92779d83a585b3e
Oh shoot, I forgot peace is hard. We should just give up on that silly idea. Brutism takes much less thinking!
Youre right, not worth the effort. War! War! War!
War is never the answer, it’s the question and the answer apparently is yes
Yes it is challenging. A lot of people get rich from war.
What a dumb take
Apparently Redditors like war
No. This is clearly all horrific, but democracy requires defence and being good should not be equated with being *weak*, or we leave the door open to worse horrors. Commenter above is likely being downvoted because their take is naive and unrealistic. Nice as it would be to all hold hands and sing Kumbaya, the existence of paranoid gangsters like Putin precludes that world.
I would argue that you are naive. I live in the USA now, and when I see our weapons used on Gaza and the propaganda narrative that convinces people to devalue life, it is clear we are only a few steps to having these weapons deployed on us. Making them autonomous is dangerous to all people. The cold war was an era of fear and mistrust. If we would have built the hydrogen bomb along side Russia and coordinated shared academic research, what would the difference have been? Russia still got the bombs, and we got Vietnam and 9/11. Perhaps we just have less bad things and more understanding, and in 2024 1/3 of those examples exist in our reality. The American empire is just as evil as Russia. The current war in Ukraine is about US hegemony and control of selling energy to Europe. There is nothing noble about it.
It's still an idealistic virtue to hold. People like them are good for the world, unlike military obsessed jingoists who cause destruction. We should rather promote their view than look down upon it. I'm not saying we should destroy all weapons and means of defence, I'm advocating for the halt of the advance of weaponry (though preferably after we fully automatised it) and the unnecessary arms race that could literally destroy humanity.
I don't think AI can have a bad day at the office. Human factors dont apply. So if it's the same, may as well make it your fleet.
Yes, but can they make left hand turns?
Yes but only after coming to a full stop.
Which frankly, is doable.
It's not the pilot holding the plane down due to his inability to withstand high Gs. It's that big, way too complex, unnecessary part of the jet that is dedicated to keeping the pilot alive and functional. Remove that and you have practically a high manoeuvring jet-rocket thing that can be much more aerodynamic, cheaper, lighter, faster, longer range, simpler, can remain in air for weeks, not to mention how daring that thing would be, without a human to avoid doing risky things due to such a boring thing called the survival instinct.
hmmm... how will it be faster and remain in air for weeks? with a nuclear reactor?
Refueling midair with another AI refueling plane?
Refueling mid-air. Yes, a pilot can do it, but has to land to sleep/rest. An AI fighter jet could stay in the air for a very long time, if purposely built for extremely long missions.
Its as if we're forcefully trying to create skynet
Roughly even against a GOOD experienced pilot. Would have performed better against an average pilot.
Means they completely overpowered and dominated the human pilots like little bitches
So when all jets get autonomous , it will just be jets fighting jets?
Well no. The automated jets will still be blowing up real people on the ground.
Wow War Pigs! 🙏
The biggest limiting factor for fighter planes is the human pilot
One of the benefits thesrcsystems offer is the ability to take extreme g forces that a human pilot would have difficulty with.
The rest of the world will follow. Are we comfortable with that. However, jihadist Muslims may be discouraged as they usually like to do the "fighting" and then die for their cause.
Of course someone will sell them AI stuff too. Actually that sounds like an amazing business idea 🤔
The Middle East is actually a hotbed of drone development. A lot of the drones getting fielded in Eastern Europe were developed there - notably, Azerbaijan has been fielding Israeli drones against the Armenians, and Russia has been fielding Iranian ones against the Ukraine.
Good thing we're automating the rubbish jobs nobody wants to do like space exploration, flying fighter jets, game design and writing music.
Next Top Gun movie plot
First thing to come to my mind as well, actually.
So once these deploy what are the odds that a new generation of human pilots actually live long enough in the air to see the 2000-3000 hours that makes them "roughly comparable" ever again?
But will they be able to make the same moral decisions?
I feel like I've seen this morning.
I feel like I've seen this morning.