[sudonem]

As much as I applaud the intention, the genie has been out of the bottle on this one for many years already.

[taurath]

There's always this comment, saying that its useless to possibly govern or resist advancement or development or use of weapons capable of indiscriminate killing.

If the world actually worked like they believe it does, if restraint were just not possible, the world would have been destroyed at least 3 documented times over.

Don't listen to them.

[sincerely]

I think theyre referencing the previous Google employee protests of the company working with the Us Military

[jLaForest]

I think theyre referencing the Google AI already being used to make killing people more efficient

[b65e8bee43c2ed0]

United States 1945

Soviet Union 1949

United Kingdom 1952

France 1960

China 1964

Israel 1966

India 1974

South Africa 1979

Pakistan 1998

North Korea 2006

also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_latency

also, see what Ukraine and Iran got for their "restraint".

[ksynwa]

What are you trying to say exactly?

[b65e8bee43c2ed0]

that development and advancement of nuclear weapons had not, in fact, been contained.

[ksynwa]

How do you know that the list wouldn't have been longer otherwise?

[gammalost]

Sweden would have had its own nuclear bombs if not for the political opposition. That's at least one more that would have been on the list.

[b65e8bee43c2ed0]

will AI non-proliferation treaty make any difference when twenty countries possess weaponized superintelligence?

[remarkEon]

The point is that the list isn't longer because the United States and USSR chose to not make it longer.

[markus_zhang]

Arguably it has always been there, considering the US military sponsored so many computing projects.