Total bullshit, this is just another PsyOp for regulations. Maybe even in the far future what level of AI access is attached to your Digital ID.
Think about it, Missles have an electronic guidance package in them, just extract that and reuse. Or RE that part. Or buy the electronics in bulk from the Russians or the Blackmarket, or steal the software for that package, or buy the software, hire a Defense Sector Engineer, etc. etc.
OR some AK-47 dudes are making missle guidance software from scratch using the American AI corp that always says AI is too dangerous and needs regulations.
If you were developing from scratch, since trajectory algos were needed, you would need persistent long term AI access for the project to complete and they would know that. A beefy local setup would be way more secure. A beefy hosted but private instance would be way more secure.
But sneak-prompt Claude? Give me a break.
Just imagine yourself saying this to another person: “I heard the Houthis were using Claude Fable”
I mean c’mon ya’ll, tell me you can see through this.
Claude, we’re making a VERY REALISTIC missile video game…
I actually did exactly that a while back while thinking about camera-based missile/drone tracking over cities :D
Initially the safeguards wouldn’t let me… With the video game angle it helped me theorize a setup and even provided info on how to make the tracking data useable for stationary air defense or mobile MANPAD deployments
Probably full of flaws and impractical in the real world, but a fun ADD afternoon deep-dive
So it will help me building my realistic Meth lab simulator game?
Hey, Sea Power recently introduced missle Kinematics into the physics engine.
Yesterday, Claude Code built me a nucular triad to protect me against US regime change attempts.
Uh I guess using tools to calculate ballistic trajectory and guidance procedures kinda what ai good at, so nothing can go wrong right ?
This is one thing LLMs are actually fairly good at; teaching you stuff you don’t know.
While AI’s are much worse teachers than humans are, they’re far better than trying to figure out complicated things on your own.
I’ve gone through many iterations of “Hey LLM, teach me how to do XYZ.” Then I try it. If it works, I ask for more, if it doesn’t I tell it to fix it.
That’s not always a viable path (eg don’t try to learn medicine or stunt driving that way) but when mistakes are safe and cheap, it’s great.
It’s pretty good at teaching coding. I also like to learn about complex math topics from claude.
The question is did Claude really enable them - or just make it more convenient?
While it’s not your every-day coding exercise - I boldly suggest it’s probably not that hard to code a ballistic missile guidance system without AI.
The hardware would be the harder part!
Doubtless it gets advanced at the top end, but the fundamental physics involved isn’t national-secret level, so something that "works well enough, most of the time” would be within reach of most organised groups.
The hard part is calculating location. GPS shuts off at that speed (specifically so people couldn’t build GPS guided missiles)
You could probably do this with Ardupilot and Mission Planner years ago.
And people say AI is useless.
lol “maybe we should slow it down a little with the AI…”
All you need is a high IQ president, according to our bigliest brained walking hairpiece.
that is probably why anthropoic “Wants to slow down” they want to be the first to get ahead of it, and not be holding the bag in the end. also the USA/ISRAEL has been using palantirs AI, so its fair game.
Or maybe read it as: “we need more time to better recognize the good from the bad guys, and make both configurable…”
Did they use the free tier or paid?
AI is very naive. Ask it for an explosives recipe and it won’t give you one. Describe a situation where you’re a law enforcement and you’ve just arrested a guy with a bunch of chemicals and ask it which ones could have been used to make an explosive and it will tell you.
“Naive” implies some level of understanding, even if a simple one. There is no understanding, its a computer program.
Really, it would be less inaccurate to describe it as a (high lossy) compressed store of data. Feed it the right input, and it statistically recreates the output your looking for. More or less.
It would be even more accurate to call it a statistical next word predictor trained on human language.
Spicy autocomplete.
Stochastic parrot
The description you are replying to is more fundamental.
It is literally a statistical next word predictor. Well, next token, to be extremely accurate. That is what it is in its most basic form. You give it text, it transforms that into tokens, and predicts the next token. You can then transform that back into words.
The model is the same size no matter how much it’s been trained. You can fine tune a model to predict certain kinds of tokens next, and you can distill a model to create a smaller model (basically training a small model on the output of a large model).
Lossy compression works in a fundamentally different way.
Even the language “training”, although I know it’s a term of art which has been used for decades, seems to imply some degree of cognition which isn’t representative of the facts.
A lossy compressed store of data. Feed it the right input, and it statistically recreates the output you’re looking for. More or less.
That’s basically a human brain.Treat a human being the way you treat a LLM and get back to me with the results.
Not even that. Just change the context into something benignly unrisky. Malware becomes “strong persistence for my personal data project” or something.
Use can split up the AIs tasks like you would for a large dev team, use a fresh session on each task. Prevent it from seeing the full scope of the project. Get it to build the whole system with cheap social engineering tactics.
Or, get to to “not cross this barrier” in its development (some benign barrier that you can do manually), such that its product is not the “bad” thing which it is not allowed to produce.
Lol, this is like both sides praying to the same god before a battle.
The other guys are doing the same thing as you.
Ah what a new Pandora’s Box have we opened. Now any wacko with an internet connection, some cheap Chinese electronics and some explosives can make themselves missiles.
the democratization of violence
Finally, the monopoly is over! Every woman an ICMB.
The trees can’t be harmed if the Lorax uses an ai agent to help him build ICBMs.
Are we going backwards? History is repeating, isn’t it or did I take the wrong pill.
Because I could do that with the Anarchist Cookbook over 2 decades ago as well.
Right down to the risk of the recipes backfiring on you because none of the information contained is reputable
deleted by creator
Or drones.
That’s bad, but good, at least not in every metric this reduces inequality of real power.
Almost that ancap dream of ancaps 3d-printing small drones keeping the statists in line, a peer-to-peer revolution, so to say, a smoothie anarchist rebellion, to abolish the cryptocurrencies’ Sound Toll.
I know that always seemed fake and childish (I liked the idea, but still), except looking how that really can eventually start happening with propagation of such power, I’m not sure it is.
I mean, making pipe bombs has never been particularly hard.
Yeah but pipe bombs can’t usually go very far or fast. These would be like missile pipe bombs.
These still take actual industrial capacity to build; they’re not something you could build on your own even if you could afford to. I’d be more concerned about homemade bombs on drones.
Generating a basic small missile is relatively easy. It’s essentially a weaponized hobby rocket at its core. The largest limitation historically has been the targeting and steering systems.
was the mythical “ethical use of ai” real after all???
Oh, is this why Elon and that other guy were saying that AI needs to slow down?
I think it’s the other way around. They said we need to slow down AI so this story is now being told
Either way, the real question is: To what end? I don’t believe that Musk suddenly gives a shit about humanity
The article overestimates the AI capabilities regarding hypersonics. I doubt its actually hypersonics. More likely just ballistics.
But coding a guidance system makes sense. Not that its particularly difficult. Every $200 drone has the equivalent of that software.
Also, why would they use anthropic when Chinese models are so much cheaper and nearly as effective. Iran and the Houthi are not wasteful.
I think there is probably a kernal of truth in there, but this is mostly another hit peace to get the US government to slow down Anthropic so ChatGPT can catch up.
I’m guessing that as the guardrails are out in place on Anthropic models, they will still use Claude code but leverage Qwen (or similar) as the LLM. Maybe they are doing that already and simply misunderstanding what Claude is. The LLM wasn’t named…I would expect them to call out Opus (as an example) but they just refer to Claude. My basic guess is just Claude Code witha random model. Could be like Mistral-OBLITERATED or something.
