AI.gov

FBISurveillance wrote: post #2

Reminds me of healthcare.gov. By the way, we've seen it years ago: * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27048048 * https://www.nextgov.com/artificial-intelligence/2019/03/whit... Still coming soon? Kudos to OP for submitting this as a reminder.

Seems the website has been updated in the last hour or so, probably as a result of the executive order announced this morning:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...

Re: AI.gov

#4

Post by cedws » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:20 PM UTC

Our governments care dearly about "AI safety" (nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet) but not a right to privacy.

Re: AI.gov

#5

Post by Beta-7 » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:35 PM UTC

cedws wrote: post #4

Our governments care dearly about "AI safety" (nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet) but not a right to privacy.

> nobody actually knows what that means

I sure hope it doesn't mean the government will shape the future of AI development how they see fit.

Re: AI.gov

#6

Post by lawlessone » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:55 PM UTC

cedws wrote: post #4

Our governments care dearly about "AI safety" (nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet) but not a right to privacy.

>nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet

Now is the time to start talking about it and taking it seriously though. If we keep avoiding trying to define it then we'll never be qualified to do so.

Re: AI.gov

#7

Post by neotrope » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 3:59 PM UTC

Can we get an AI Force as well? If AI is a threat, only option is escalation.

Re: AI.gov

#8

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:00 PM UTC

neotrope wrote: post #7

Can we get an AI Force as well? If AI is a threat, only option is escalation.

> Can we get an AI Force as well?

In case you actually didn’t know [1].

[1] https://www.ai.mil/

Re: AI.gov

#9

Post by empath-nirvana » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:04 PM UTC

The US government can't legally pay the salaries required to find AI experts right now (just look at the salaries on the open positions). So all this work will end up being done by contractors who _can_ pay those salaries while the contractors skim off the top.

The US really needs a special schedule for software developers if they want technical expertise in house (and they really should have technical expertise in house)

Re: AI.gov

#10

Post by filoleg » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 4:04 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #8

neotrope wrote: post #7

Can we get an AI Force as well? If AI is a threat, only option is escalation.

> Can we get an AI Force as well? In case you actually didn’t know [1]. [1] https://www.ai.mil/

I think the grandparent comment was talking about making AI Force a separate military branch, rather than a joint office under DoD.

Not arguing one way or another myself, I think it makes sense for it, at least for now, to be a joint office under DoD (like it currently is, according to your link). Just wanted to make it clear that CDAO is probably not what the grandparent poster had in mind when they made that comment.