this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
258 points (90.3% liked)

Technology

81933 readers
2631 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
258
AIs can’t stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations— Leading AIs from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google opted to use nuclear weapons in simulated war games in 95% of cases (arxiv.org)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by Beep@lemmus.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

PDF.

Today’s leading AI models engage in sophisticated behaviour when placed in strategic competition. They spontaneously attempt deception, signaling intentions they do not intend to follow; they demonstrate rich theory of mind, reasoning about adversary beliefs and anticipating their actions; and they exhibit credible metacognitive self-awareness, assessing their own strategic abilities before deciding how to act.

Here we present findings from a crisis simulation in which three frontier large language models (GPT-5.2, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 3 Flash) play opposing leaders in a nuclear crisis.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 15 hours ago

The bomb on nagasaki was a strategic nuke, not a tactical. Though yields have only increased since then.

These LLMs were fed a narrative and scenario and made to play where survival is tied to military success. They are by no means designed for any of this and I didn't suggest it either.

People lump together AI with AI but there are vast differences among them in how they work and what they're designed to do and take into consideration.

If a military is talking about AI, they're not talking about asking what Gemini thinks. They're talking about feeding a highly sophisticated algorithm more data than any human could look through and find patterns.

I don't think AI should decide nuclear questions either. But it doesn't change that the headline of this post, is in direct contradiction of the article