It's totally plausible, just pointless for most of us to spend any time thinking about.

If someone with $200,000 wants me specifically dead, I'm going to die, one way or another. This tech doesn't substantially change the likelihood of their success.

If they want to cause a mass casualty event, there are already much easier ways. Once we tackle some of those, we can start worrying about this.

Not too different from psychos with a knife/gun/bomb or whatever.

They're out there. It will be done. Innocent (or not-so-innocent?) victims will fall. Manhunts for those that deployed a hostile drone swarm, will be mounted. In most cases, perpetrators will be found & put behind bars.

Society goes on because decent people far outnumber the nutcases.

Military uses? Terrorists? Yeah war is gruesome. Try hard(er) to avoid getting into a war.

fun game: read only the last two sentences of each paragraph

The subject matter is interesting but the blog post is obviously written by AI or at least heavily edited :(

And the Hacker News title should be changed to the slop title in the article, "It's Not The Terminator. It's worse"

The first link in the article leads to http://localhost:1313/posts/0002-the-reluctant-gunner/

what is plausible is a deleet everything attack, all of it, deleet, scramble, encrypt, overheat, whatever, it takes, turn it all off now! and all it needs is someone to make the right prompt, or just another random AI glitch

Fourteen hundred words of slop on a topic I'd otherwise be happy to read about. What a waste!