Schumer knows nothing about the topic. He does have corporate consultants helping him out, with wallets in hand.
This is being driven by the big companies, seeking to erect barriers to competition.
Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
11–20 of 21 posts
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#12I’ve thought about this a bit, but don’t have an answer as to if it should be regulated or not. However, it’s clear we haven’t yet seen how AI/ML can be weaponised by bad actors and how it is going to end up affecting our society. We have already seen how deepfake revenge porn can affect women disproportionately. I’m just not sure we should wait this one out.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#13Something tells me that this is a “we’re the lobbyists and we’re here to help” type of situation. Probably not going to get anything that we should.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#14A repeat of healthcare, this time for computing. It's 2023, the commons cant win.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#15> "...concerns about the technology’s impact on...national security."
Really now? Sheesh. What are we worried about skynet?
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#16The conversation I see around AI regulation makes me wonder if we haven't considered some positive aspects.
For example, the CFPB, FDIC, SEC, et. al. exist in order to regulate behaviors of certain financial services providers. From the perspective of fintech enthusiasts, much of this regulation is seen as frustrating yet quite sensible & justifiable. It is really easy to find ourselves in the position of being the customer with sensitive PII/$$$ on the table, and with this perspective in mind a lot of the rules feel pretty good.
Perhaps regulations would be more along axis of "you cannot combine PII with a generative AI system for any application" or "please notify agency ABC if you intend to replace >50% of your workforce with robots". The tech sphere seems to keep reaching for "we will limit one (1) GPU per household", but I don't think this is the direction we are actually headed in.
As an engineer working with banking and tech, I enjoy the presence of most of these regulations. The fact that rules are on paper and have consequences that the MBAs feel in their souls, gives me the ability to negotiate very strongly with them regarding what is "right" and "wrong". Steering ethical conversations is a lot easier when you have certain road marks to look out for. When everyone understands that "oh yeah if we don't disclose overdraft we are in hells: A,B,C & D @ audit time" things move like a well-oiled machine when the developer says something isn't compliant anymore.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#17Schumer knows nothing about the topic. He does have corporate consultants helping him out, with wallets in hand. This is being driven by the big companies, seeking to erect barriers to competition.
The sad part is that this very same can be said about 99% of the laws and regulations that are written. He is 73 years old and listening to him speak I don't think he could figure out how to set the clock on a microwave, much less understand the intricacies of the bleeding edge of the most transformative technology to come about in the last 40 years. I very seriously doubt he knows anything besides what is fed to him by the very companies that are to be regulated. Lobbyists write our laws, congress is just there to collect the money from them and plan their insider stock trades accordingly.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#18> "...concerns about the technology’s impact on...national security." Really now? Sheesh. What are we worried about skynet?
National security is used like a cheat code to terminate dissenting thoughts.
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#19Why is this happening? Who is causing it to happen? Why do lawmakers feel it will be a benefit? Are they afraid of some outcome? Are they trying to induce some outcome? This seems like fear + buzzwords to me, and it seems like we are about to get some really bad legislation out of it, by people who don't understand the technology or the uses of the technology. EDIT: It also seems like it might be a connected-industry…
All of the above. But I do have another perspective:
Both the companies and the government are reacting to the genuine public will. Maybe not reacting in a forthright and effective way, but public opinion is surely a major factor.
The majority of Americans believe that AI is a potential threat to the survival of the human species. [1] And a large minority aren't just abstractly worried or a little worried; they are seriously worried about societal derangement and collapse - or Terminators - in the near future.
OpenAI's oddly eager call to be regulated might be understood in that light. A business which is percieved as an existential threat to all of civilization needs some PR damage control ASAP.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/ai-threatens-humanitys-fu...
Re: Schumer launches ‘all hands on deck’ push to regulate AI
#20The conversation I see around AI regulation makes me wonder if we haven't considered some positive aspects. For example, the CFPB, FDIC, SEC, et. al. exist in order to regulate behaviors of certain financial services providers. From the perspective of fintech enthusiasts, much of this regulation is seen as frustrating yet quite sensible & justifiable. It is really easy to find ourselves in the position of being the c…
I don't think regulation is necessarily a bad thing, but I don't know that it makes sense to be this proactive.
I've worked in fintech and for every regulation that I asked about, there was some event in history someone could point to and say "this is what it's trying to stop".
Those regulations feel like the accumulation of a lot of painfully learned lessons over a long time. Some are more onerous than others, but they're all trying to prevent things that have happened.
AI regulation feels speculative at this point. We're trying to guess at what issues AI could cause, then guess at what a reasonable solution to our hypothetical is. I'd rather legislators were waiting to swiftly head off issues if/when they appear, though my inner cynic says that "Congress" and "swift" do not belong in the same sentence.