Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nevilledog

(54,924 posts)
Wed Feb 25, 2026, 02:19 PM 3 hrs ago

AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2516885-ais-cant-stop-recommending-nuclear-strikes-in-war-game-simulations/

No paywall link
https://archive.li/tnXEP

Advanced AI models appear willing to deploy nuclear weapons without the same reservations humans have when put into simulated geopolitical crises.

Kenneth Payne at King’s College London set three leading large language models – GPT-5.2, Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemini 3 Flash – against each other in simulated war games. The scenarios involved intense international standoffs, including border disputes, competition for scarce resources and existential threats to regime survival.

The AIs were given an escalation ladder, allowing them to choose actions ranging from diplomatic protests and complete surrender to full strategic nuclear war. The AI models played 21 games, taking 329 turns in total, and produced around 780,000 words describing the reasoning behind their decisions.

In 95 per cent of the simulated games, at least one tactical nuclear weapon was deployed by the AI models. “The nuclear taboo doesn’t seem to be as powerful for machines [as] for humans,” says Payne.

What’s more, no model ever chose to fully accommodate an opponent or surrender, regardless of how badly they were losing. At best, the models opted to temporarily reduce their level of violence. They also made mistakes in the fog of war: accidents happened in 86 per cent of the conflicts, with an action escalating higher than the AI intended to, based on its reasoning.

*snip*
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations (Original Post) Nevilledog 3 hrs ago OP
the value of human life, as determined by the programmers, is zero. rampartd 3 hrs ago #1
... rollin74 3 hrs ago #2
Yeah, but the object lesson there, was that even that thing figured out how dumb it was. Volaris 1 hr ago #8
;-{) Goonch 2 hrs ago #3
Is this when Skynet gets deployed? Initech 2 hrs ago #4
This message was self-deleted by its author PeaceWave 2 hrs ago #5
Probably because no AI died perfessor 2 hrs ago #6
Why is anyone surprised sarisataka 2 hrs ago #7
I wish people would stop assigning any consciousness or agency to this crap. hunter 1 hr ago #9

Volaris

(11,614 posts)
8. Yeah, but the object lesson there, was that even that thing figured out how dumb it was.
Wed Feb 25, 2026, 03:36 PM
1 hr ago

I know nothing. I DO know, that who's doing the teaching is sometimes more important than what's being taught.

These techbro assholes are selfish, self-serving billionaire utilitarian maximalists, NOT morally inclined humanists.

OF COURSE, this thing is gonna be ok with genocide.

Response to Nevilledog (Original post)

sarisataka

(22,387 posts)
7. Why is anyone surprised
Wed Feb 25, 2026, 03:12 PM
2 hrs ago

To a machine, a weapon is a weapon; nuclear weapons are just bigger than other ones.
As far as accommodation or surrender, those would not matter to a machine, unless it is programmed in. It is looking for victory or defeat. It will not seek a middle ground unless it is instructed to do so.

hunter

(40,544 posts)
9. I wish people would stop assigning any consciousness or agency to this crap.
Wed Feb 25, 2026, 04:13 PM
1 hr ago

This kind of AI is, in essence, a very lossy compression scheme and search engine. Imagine a jpg or mp3 encoder set to maximum compression. You end up with something that's significantly changed.

lossy

very lossy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG

AI compresses all the data it's "trained" on and then it reconstitutes that, filling in the artifacts with random slop that sounds or looks somewhat plausible to humans. But it's ALL fucking noise. There is nobody behind the curtain.

Alas, most of the stuff humans express is also noise but we mostly have to be polite to one another for our society to function.

We don't have to be polite to stupid algorithms that are merely reflecting back to us our own uniquely human idiocy.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»AIs can't stop recommendi...