>>explosive munitions. Good luck acquiring that without raising any flags
Not if you were a bit precocious in HC chemistry; I know my friends and I were not even close to alone in knowing all kinds of interesting fireworks recipes, all of which were well tested, and could be configured for anything from a small 'pop' to far more power than a slaughterbot. All from basic chemicals that can be easily be acquired without raising an eyebrow (could alternatively just repurpose a bullet/ shotgun shell, very easily obtained). The ability to put it right on target means that very little is needed.
>>acquiring all the training data and ML modals to actually make them useful.
Sure, if you are looking for fully ai-controlled and integrated with a city-wide CCTV system, that's a big task. But drone control and swarming is already out of the bag. Even a basic open-source Pixhawk does obstacle avoidance, and so can likely be reprogrammed for obstacle-targeting. Multiple off-the-shelf drones have done "follow-me" for years. I'd be astonished if a competent team with five-figure funding couldn't make a working system that could be deployed near a target, ID, it and home in.
We're way past needing state funding. The fact that it is not here suggests that while the scenario is scary, it is not actually that useful? Perhaps that's hoping too much.
I agree with all your points. I've been saying to my friends that I think one of the wealthy billionaires could possibly become a serious power. I think we can all agree Elon Musk could make this happen easily with his existing SpaceX people, and then build a bajillion of them with his Tesla people.
I wonder how far EM could go if he went full evil, full throttle and tried to take over something [the world? a country?] with a drone fleet?
Charging stations seems easily solved, so the drones never need direct human interaction.
I don't. He's the obvious choice for this thought scenario for several reasons:
1) He's the richest man on the planet
2) He has competence (arguably, but that's another debate)
3) He already has all the infrastructure, experience, and people to do close to this exact thing
4) He's already widely considered evil or at least hated
If you sub in Bezos, I'm guessing he's got a lead on EM in the software, but he'll be way behind in other areas.
If you sub in Buffet or Gates, then I have no idea how to even have this flippant conversation, because I have no idea how to rate their ability to get the job done.
I'm confident 3 of the 4 above could solve the problems of "make autopiloting, auto-targeting AI drones, and produce millions of them." I'm sure countless people could solve those problems and have the means to get it done. Have your choice of billionaires and motives, or nation-states and motives, or aliens and motives.
Maybe I should have chosen Santa Claus. I do really have a hard-on for him.
They do, but I don't think this is an example of that — but Musk's position w/Tesla and SpaceX makes him uniquely positioned to develop & deploy such tech.
That said, with all the advantages Musk would have if he "went full Evil", if he challenged something that got the US military involved, I'd bet on the US Military. In a straight-up fight, they're the most lethal force that ever existed. You might get away with 'sucker-punching' them a few times, but not for long.
Not if you were a bit precocious in HC chemistry; I know my friends and I were not even close to alone in knowing all kinds of interesting fireworks recipes, all of which were well tested, and could be configured for anything from a small 'pop' to far more power than a slaughterbot. All from basic chemicals that can be easily be acquired without raising an eyebrow (could alternatively just repurpose a bullet/ shotgun shell, very easily obtained). The ability to put it right on target means that very little is needed.
>>acquiring all the training data and ML modals to actually make them useful.
Sure, if you are looking for fully ai-controlled and integrated with a city-wide CCTV system, that's a big task. But drone control and swarming is already out of the bag. Even a basic open-source Pixhawk does obstacle avoidance, and so can likely be reprogrammed for obstacle-targeting. Multiple off-the-shelf drones have done "follow-me" for years. I'd be astonished if a competent team with five-figure funding couldn't make a working system that could be deployed near a target, ID, it and home in.
We're way past needing state funding. The fact that it is not here suggests that while the scenario is scary, it is not actually that useful? Perhaps that's hoping too much.