AI is under fire. This might cheer up the doomsayers.
For those who want to put a leash on Artificial Intelligence (AI) this is a good news. I will quote from two sources. I get TIME magazine weekly, which is mostly about the USA and I read the Times (daily news paper in the UK) from English language sources.
White House threatens big tech bosses over AI
"Technology companies have been threatened by the US government with new regulations unless they rein in potentially dangerous developments in artificial intelligence.
At a meeting at the White House executives from companies including Google, Microsoft and OpenAI were told that they had an “ethical, moral and legal responsibility” to protect the public.
Kamala Harris, the US vice-president, held the meeting, which was also attended by Jeff Zients, President Biden’s chief of staff, Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, and Gina Raimondo, secretary of commerce."
The article covers the case at length that Google and Microsoft fiercely defending ChatGPT and the likes, and while government officials admit that it has “potential to improve people’s lives and tackle some of society’s biggest challenges”, Harris added, that "AI has the potential to dramatically increase threats to safety and security, infringe civil rights and privacy, and erode public trust and faith in democracy."
I am an avid AI supporter, however I also agree, that technology is a two bladed sword. Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, said: “It’s good to try to get ahead of this. It’s definitely going to be a challenge but it’s one I think we can handle.”
Another article, which is from the Time Magazine:
Big Tech nervous as Europe prepares to regulate AI
"European lawmakers are putting the finishing touches on a set of wide-ranging rules designed to govern the use of artificial intelligence. If passed, those rules would make the E.U. the first major jurisdiction outside of China to pass AI targeted regulations."
The regulations will ban AI that ranks citizens based on their behaviour and face recognition in public and the way they are set up they might become the foundation of global standards. OpenAI's ChatGPT is not specifically targeted, however it is part of the so-called general purpose AIs they consider as high risk, and thus subject to stricter rules. But they also admit that predicting all potential risks of general-purpose AI is not only impossible but also would limit innovation.
The magazine also mentions that Google and Microsoft are heavily lobbying against the regulations.
Good or bad? Who knows. Which brings me to a short story I read nearly 40 years ago, that has been spread around since. You might have heard it:
In a village an old farmer and his son lived and worked hard. They had one horse that was vital for the harder tasks.
One day the horse ran away. The neighbours felt bad for the old farmer and their son and cried: "Such a bad luck. So sad. So sad."
The old man just shrugged. "Good, or bad? Who knows?"
Some days later the horse came back with a bunch of friends. Wild horses. The neighbours cheered and envied the old man and his son "What a wonderful luck. So good for them."
The old man just shrugged again. "Good, or bad? Who knows?"
The son had to break the wild horses in before they could be put to use. He fell and badly broke his leg.
The neighbours cried: "What bad luck. So sad, so sad."
The old man just shrugged. "Good, or bad? Who knows?"
The country was at war, and so the military was visiting every town and village to take all the able young men to fight. They didn't take the old man's son because of his injuries.
Good, or bad? Who knows?
Recent Comments
38
The problem with regulation is that if one country or broader jurisdiction aims to regulate, there will be many that won't. Who will have the competitive advantage in this case? The countries that don't regulate it.
I am not sure what is more scary, the idea of AI itself and how disruptive it is to many facets of our conventional job marketplace, or governments trying to regulate it and giving everyone else a competitive advantage in the tech world.
Interesting times, indeed!
Yes, true. I guess I'll just have to move again (#56) to the place where it will be unregulated lol
I am kind of on the fence about AI. I do think it has the potential to be a great innovation. However, that same innovation can be used unwisely. We need to make sure and use it wisely.
Check out my response to Phil's post. This Email Thing Is Just a Passing Fad JD
If you can't trust the govts then you will never be able to trust AI. Its as simple as that.
Mel
I trust neither. Iran is already using AI for greater suppression of its people.
My days online are numbered. Time to go off grid.
We can definitely agree on that, Andy! What are their motives behind it though? To get rid of all of us undesireables, and to hoard all the money?
Jeff
Placing guardrails on AI has been on the works . It’s about time that the US government step up on their responsibilities and actively put regulatories in place. Even with that nobody is certain that corruption won’t play a role, as it has been since time immemorial. We just have to be really vigilant about the entire thing.
Love your post sequel story ! Good, or bad? Who knows?
Thank you for this post Andy!
Cheers,
Maria 🌹
It's my pleasure. And I agree. Although Microsoft and Google are mighty, when the regulations come, the question is, who will be regulated and who will not?
Thank you. It's one of my favourite and genuinely life-changing stories.
Hopefully not THIS government right now, Marioi! A total S%$T Show in my opinion. They need to step aside and allow the adults back in the room!
Corruption in both parties will only make this even worse.
One day at a time!
Jeffoi
Oh I agree with you 💯 per cent Jeffoi!
Nothing better has happened since the start of this administration!!!
But I was referring to the post sequel story after Andy’s main post! ~ “ Good, or bad? Who knows? “
See more comments
I am leaning towards what Kyle says, with an added worry.
The companies and governments have likely developed AI way further than is available to the general public. And will continue to do so regardless of legislation.
I liken it to the gain of function research. And many other not so great research such as Dr. Delgado carried on in the sixties and seventies.
When I hear talk of regulation, my first thought is the purpose is to limit what the public can do, our choices. The folks who control continue on without a care.
Regards,
Jason
Yes. Legislations are only for us, the little guys. The ones in power, politicians, corporations, and rich individuals will remain unaffected. But it is and always have been that way.