Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI.gov

ai.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 266 posts

Re: AI.gov

#11

Post by mattnewton »

empath-nirvana wrote: post #9

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 h…

Can’t they just use the contractor loophole?

Re: AI.gov

#12

Post by mattnewton »

Beta-7 wrote: post #5
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.

No that seems to be exactly the plan. Or rather, how some lobbyists they are talking to see fit. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/30/biden-a...

Re: AI.gov

#13

Post by latchkey »

Discussions on similar submissions related to this website:

Agency inventories of AI use cases https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32712177 (September 4, 2022 — 2 points, 0 comments)

National Artificial Intelligence Initiative https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27048048 (May 5, 2021 — 202 points, 102 comments)

Re: AI.gov

#14

Post by pesfandiar »

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.

The United States has by far the largest consumer market in the world. A right to privacy hinders access to that market and slows it down.

Re: AI.gov

#17

Post by zzzzzzzza »

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.

"Protecting Americans’ Privacy"

is the second top level bullet point out of 8 top level bullet points

Re: AI.gov

#18

Post by clbrmbr »

I predict the rise of anti-technology cults as the moral panic over AI and “Social” takes hold. The millions of displaced workers and disillusioned social-users will need refuge.

Re: AI.gov

#19

Post by api »

clbrmbr wrote: post #18

I predict the rise of anti-technology cults as the moral panic over AI and “Social” takes hold. The millions of displaced workers and disillusioned social-users will need refuge.

I predict that AI is going to increase demand for workers in knowledge work, though it will also change the nature of some of that work.

When an efficiency increasing technology comes along, things tend to grow and not shrink. Cars massively increased the number of people employed in transportation related and adjacent fields, to give just one example.

Social is another beast entirely. There's already a huge backlash there, and justifiably so.

Re: AI.gov

#20

Post by hiddencost »

mattnewton wrote: post #11
empath-nirvana wrote: post #9

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 h…

Can’t they just use the contractor loophole?

Career bureaucrats have historically been more loyal to the government, IME, and have their incentives better aligned.
Post reply on HN