Army comes clean about its recruitment AI, accidentally discloses info about pedophile- and terrorist-catching chatbots that roam the net


“the type was legible through the black strikeouts”

Well, then that’s a mistake they won’t make again. Is there a reason to disclose this exploit so the government can fix it?


Can the Army create a chatbot that exposes their problem with prosecuting rapists, so female recruits can get an honest look at what they’re signing up for?


Wow. They must have come a long way since ELIZA.


Good question. I’m not sure how to answer that. Please try rewording your question. I understand simple questions best.


Army Dumb

1 Like

An honest look at what they’re signing up for, huh? I think it’d be hard to create a chatbot that adequately expresses what it’s like to murder foreign people for vague political reasons.

I suppose it could always send them links to patriotic snuff films? Nothing like watching the light go out of someone’s eyes as they twitch and shudder in a growing pool of their own blood, clutching pointlessly at the gaping hole you put through their chest in order to pay for college.


INTERNAL MEMO: user 8080256256 knows too much.

That’s a good point sir. Conduct your business as usual.


Time to watch “Computer Chess” again.


1 Like

Forgive my poor brain if I’m just missing sarcasm, but my first thought on reading the article was “I can’t believe this has happened again”. There have been so many cases of documents with ‘removed’ information which is actualy still accessible that you’d think it would go out of fashion - and yet the news stories keep on coming…

Of course their recruiting tools are easy access, efficient, and high tech –

Meanwhile, veterans dealing with the V.A. have paper based files, backlogged phone lines, and waiting lists.

Such f’d up priorities our decision makers have. It’s despicable.


True, this is hardly the first time something like that has happened. But still, why remind them?

Occasionally, people with actual consciences turn up in these information streams. So such leakage may be only air-quotedly accidental. In which case it’ll keep happening despite reminders of procedure error, in ever more inventive ways.


what you call “accidental leak” i call “plausible denyability” … just sayin.

YOU:   So, how old are you?
ELIZA: What if I were ?
SWAT: Get down! Get down! Get down!

SWAT: Shoot the dog! Shoot the dog! Shoot the dog!

1 Like

Remember Dr. Sbaitso on Creative Sound Blaster sound cards? :wink:


I spent years working in blank Intelligence areas and part of that time was teaching agents that the only safe way to redact was to put the black stuff in, print it, check it then scan the printouts back in as PDF’s. You got a good electronic format, a searchable body and stuff that wasn’t supposed to be there damn well wasn’t.

I see not enough people listened.

Now that I am out of this stuff, I see it as a good thing that very unthinking people still do this stuff and don’t even check it but it annoys the hell out of me professionally. .

I do! OMG, I do! (shoots self)

1 Like