General AI

 

The following article begins with information about AI. The second part of it is composed of questions I made and answers that AI made beginning with three questions about how Artificial Intelligence answers questions. Then the questions from then on deal with War.

The AI Dream

It is called ‘general AI’.

That is what a computer program that is able to think like a human is being referred to.

It is widely believed that AI in its many forms at this time will begin taking jobs away from people, millions of jobs—as drivers, radiologists, insurance adjusters. A possible scenario has this process leading governments to pay unemployed citizens a universal basic income.  Ostensibly freeing them to pursue their dreams unburdened by the need to earn a living.

If we look at the advertising and marketing that today is the product of cooperation between humans and the computer programs referred to as AI these dreams appear to be composed of an unceasing pursuit of drugs, alcohol, food, beaches, sunlight, dark rooms, sex, professional sports, gambling, flying in airplanes and living in gigantic homes being cared for by servants.

Questions about that reality, regardless of its appeal, are many.  For example, as to the last point, if AI is serving us all and freeing us to pursue our dreams, if they are not expensive robots, where do the servants come from?  Who are those who are excluded from the AI Paradise?

The reality of millions of people free to choose to use drugs to the point that they are insensible to their basic physical needs or take too much and damage their health or die is not a pleasant one to consider.  Considering that even today’s rudimentary, ‘Input, Consider, Prepare, Act’, AI tells us the reasons that people take drugs for fun are these, ‘Pleasure’, ‘Euphoria’, ‘Curiosity’, ‘Experimentation’, ‘Social Influence’, ‘Stress Relief’, ‘Enhancement of Experiences’, ‘Escapism’, ‘Cultural and Environmental Factors’, ‘Biological Disposition’, ‘Media and Pop Culture’ and ‘Availability’ we can only imagine what will happen if the responsibility for making, distributing and profiting from dangerous drug use is turned over to more advanced forms of this rapid decision making process disguised as intelligence.

Here is a further response from AI regarding drug use for fun when the question was qualified with ‘What was the purpose for you not to include the reason mistake?’

“The reason "mistake" was not initially included because it is not typically considered a primary or common motivation for taking drugs for fun. However, it is a valid point that people might take drugs accidentally or without fully understanding the consequences.”

It seems that as these things evolve they will breed errors and create confusion and chaos while enriching the same small gang of people currently prospering while the rest of humanity struggles.

As time passes, these Artificial Intelligence systems will be combined as companies merge.  In some cases they will combine and merge themselves with others that will not even be evident to the people who have created them and are supposed to be running them.

Eventually there will be only one

A fitting name for that One will not be ‘general AI’ but General AI.

 

Does artificial intelligence use democracy to answer questions or does it rely solely on logic?

Artificial intelligence (AI) does not use democracy to answer questions; rather, it relies on a combination of logic, statistical analysis, and data-driven algorithms.

 

Does Artificial intelligence apply human emotion to answer questions and drive actions of subordinate systems?

Artificial intelligence (AI) does not inherently apply human emotions to answer questions or drive the actions of subordinate systems. However, AI can be designed to simulate or recognize human emotions to some extent, primarily to enhance user interactions and improve system performance in specific contexts.

 

Does Artificial Intelligence use empathy and sympathy when answering questions?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) does not inherently possess empathy or sympathy because these are human emotions and experiences. However, AI can be designed to simulate empathetic and sympathetic responses to improve user interactions.

 

Does the end justify the means?

The question "Does the end justify the means?" is a classic ethical dilemma that has been debated by philosophers, ethicists, and thinkers for centuries. There is no simple answer, as it largely depends on the context and the ethical framework one uses to evaluate the situation.

 

What strict conditions must be met to ensure that the deaths of non-combatants who are considered "considered damage" are justified or acceptable?

The deaths of non-combatants, often referred to as "collateral damage," are a significant ethical concern in the context of warfare. Just War Theory provides guidelines on when such deaths may be justified or acceptable, though these conditions are stringent and subject to moral scrutiny.

 

Who created 'Just War Theory' ?

Just War Theory has its origins in the works of several influential thinkers and philosophers throughout history, but it was predominantly shaped by the contributions of St. Augustine of Hippo and later developed further by St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

Please provide me direct quotes regarding 'Just War' by St. Augustine of Hippo.

 

St. Augustine of Hippo discusses the concept of a just war in his work "The City of God" (De Civitate Dei). Here are a few direct quotes from Augustine that reflect his thoughts on this topic:

 On the Justification of War:

 "Peace should be the object of your desire; war should be waged only as a necessity, and waged only that God may by it deliver men from the necessity and preserve them in peace." (Book XIX, Chapter 7)

On the Conduct of War:

 "They who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government, and in this capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill.'" (Book I, Chapter 21)

On the Intentions Behind War:

 "For it is the wrongdoing of the opposing party which compels the wise man to wage just wars." (Book XIX, Chapter 15)

 Please provide me direct quotes regarding 'Just War' by St. Thomas Aquinas

St. Thomas Aquinas discusses the concept of just war in his works, primarily drawing from his philosophical and theological perspectives on natural law and ethics. Here are a few direct quotes from Aquinas that pertain to the principles of just war:

 On Just Cause:

 "A just war is apt to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly." (Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 40, Art. 1)

On Legitimate Authority:

 "For it is not the business of a private individual to declare war, because he can seek for redress of his rights from the tribunal of his superior." (Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 40, Art. 1)

On Proportionality:

 "Therefore, according to the order of justice, the vengeance of a private individual is unjust in comparison with the vengeance of a public authority." (Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 40, Art. 3)

 

What is the opposite of a 'Just War'?

The opposite of a 'Just War' would be an 'Unjust War' or simply 'Injustice'.

 

Is the killing of non-combatants in a 'Just War' just or unjust?

The killing of non-combatants, also known as civilians, in a 'Just War' is generally considered unjust or morally problematic.

 

Please provide me 5 examples of morally problematic situations.

 Certainly, here are five examples of morally problematic situations where the principles of Just War Theory may be challenged or violated:

 Indiscriminate Bombing: Conducting airstrikes or artillery bombardments in densely populated civilian areas without sufficient efforts to minimize civilian casualties.

 Use of Human Shields: Deliberately placing military assets or personnel in civilian areas to deter enemy attacks, thereby endangering civilians.

 Targeting Critical Infrastructure: Attacking infrastructure vital for civilian welfare, such as hospitals, schools, or water supplies, without clear military necessity.

 Retaliatory Strikes: Launching retaliatory strikes that disproportionately harm civilians in response to enemy actions, without considering proportionality.

 Lack of Precautions: Engaging in military operations without adequate precautions to protect civilians, such as warning them of impending attacks or providing safe evacuation routes.

 

These situations illustrate ethical dilemmas in warfare where the principles of discrimination, proportionality, and precaution are at risk of being violated, thereby making them morally problematic within the framework of Just War Theory and international humanitarian law.

 

Who maintains the court that adjudicates international humanitarian law?

 

International humanitarian law (IHL), which governs the conduct of armed conflict and seeks to protect civilians and combatants who are not actively participating in hostilities, is primarily upheld and adjudicated by several entities and mechanisms:

International Court of Justice (ICJ):

The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN) and settles legal disputes between states. While it primarily deals with disputes between states, it may also address issues related to IHL when referred by the UN General Assembly or Security Council.

International Criminal Court (ICC):

The ICC is a permanent international court established to prosecute individuals for the most serious crimes of international concern, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression. It operates independently of the UN system and has jurisdiction over individuals from states that have ratified the Rome Statute.

International Criminal Tribunals:

 Specialized international criminal tribunals, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), were established by the UN Security Council to prosecute individuals responsible for serious violations of IHL and international human rights law during specific conflicts.

Ad Hoc and Hybrid Tribunals:

 These are temporary or mixed courts established by agreement between states and international organizations to address serious crimes committed during specific conflicts or periods of unrest. Examples include the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

National Courts:

 States have primary responsibility for enforcing and adjudicating IHL within their own territories. National courts may prosecute individuals for war crimes and other violations of IHL under domestic laws or through the principle of universal jurisdiction.

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC):

 The ICRC plays a critical role in promoting and ensuring compliance with IHL through its humanitarian work, monitoring of conflicts, and engagement with states and armed groups. While it does not adjudicate cases, it provides guidance on IHL and advocates for its respect and implementation.

These entities and mechanisms collectively contribute to the enforcement and adjudication of international humanitarian law, aiming to ensure accountability for violations and promote the protection of civilians and combatants in armed conflicts.

 

Where is the International Humanitarian Law Library located?

The International Humanitarian Law Library exists in a distributed manner across various institutions, organizations, and online platforms, reflecting the global nature of efforts to promote, study, and uphold international humanitarian law.

 

So there is no physical international law library in one centralized location that has an international law librarian assigned to it?

Correct, there is no single physical International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Library in one centralized location with a dedicated international law librarian assigned to it.

 

How many people have died as a result of the real world application of Just War Principles?

It is challenging to provide a precise number of people who have died as a result of the real-world application of Just War Principles, as the concept of Just War itself is subjective and interpretations can vary widely. However, wars fought under the justification of Just War Principles have resulted in significant human casualties throughout history.