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

Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 288 posts

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#41

Post by AndrewKemendo »

rubyfan wrote: post #34

Is it me or does this seem like naked corruption at its worst? These tech CEOs hang out at the White House and donate to superfluous causes and suddenly the executive is protecting their interests. This does nothing to protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes.

> protect working US citizens from AI alien (agents) coming to take their jobs and displace their incomes

So where is this coalition that’s organized to actually make this real?

Software engineers are allergic to unionization (despite the recent id win) and 100% of capital owners (this is NOT business owner and operators I’m talking about LPs and Fund Managers) are in support of labor automation as a priority, the same people also run every government and overwhelmingly select the politicians available to vote for, so who will fund and lead your advocacy?

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#42

Post by peterlk »

dav- wrote: post #35
treetalker wrote: post #5

Federal Preemption: A Legal Primer — https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45825

What does this have to do with executive orders?

The link is highly relevant to the executive order because this executive order attempts to place limitations on what laws US states can create.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#43

Post by gigatree »

LPisGood wrote: post #32
throw0101a wrote: post #8

Executive order (EO) count over the last few presidents: * Bush (41): 166 * Clinton (two terms): 364 * Bush (43; two terms): 291 * Obama (two terms): 276 * Trump (45): 220 * Biden: 162 * Trump (47; Source: * https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or... Someone commented that (one of?) the reason that Trump is using EOs so much is probably because is not willing (or able) to actually get deals on in…

I once heard it said that Trump governs like a dictator because he is too weak to govern like a president. He is extremely unpopular and his party holds one of the smallest house majorities ever.

*Extremely unpopular in DC, fwiw

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#44

Post by lesuorac »

peterlk wrote: post #42
dav- wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this have to do with executive orders?

The link is highly relevant to the executive order because this executive order attempts to place limitations on what laws US states can create.

EOs aren't law though. They're guidance for the rest of the executive branch on how to execute the laws written by congress.

The Legislative branch (Congress) not the Executive branch (White House) can preempt states.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#46

Post by twisteriffic »

lesuorac wrote: post #44
peterlk wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The link is highly relevant to the executive order because this executive order attempts to place limitations on what laws US states can create.

EOs aren't law though. They're guidance for the rest of the executive branch on how to execute the laws written by congress. The Legislative branch (Congress) not the Executive branch (White House) can preempt states.

I don't know if you've heard, but norms don't matter anymore.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#47

Post by lesuorac »

Alupis wrote: post #38
LPisGood wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once heard it said that Trump governs like a dictator because he is too weak to govern like a president. He is extremely unpopular and his party holds one of the smallest house majorities ever.

There is a very vocal opposition to Trump. However, by almost any way you can present "popularity" of a president - be it approval ratings, polling figures, popular vote, electoral vote, etc. - he is one of the more popular presidents in US history. It's easy to get caught in an echo chamber of like-minded individuals and assume everyone disagrees with his policies - but that is far from reality.

> However, by almost any way you can present "popularity" of a president - be it approval ratings, polling figures, popular vote, electoral vote, etc. - he is one of the more popular presidents in US history.

You might want to look up those data yourself because uh he's actually unpopular in those metrics.

Approval - 42.5% [1]. Much better than Trump's love interest Biden's 37.1% [2] but being below 50% is unpopular.

Popular Vote / Electoral Vote - 49.8%, 312. I may need to tell you this so I will. 50% is greater than 49.8%; a majority of voters (nevermind the country) did not want Trump. As before, this is better than Biden's 306 and Trump1's 304 but worse than Obama2 (332), Obama1 (365) and in general 312 (57%) is nothing to write home about.

[1]: https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-sil...

[2]: https://www.natesilver.net/p/why-biden-failed

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#48

Post by lesuorac »

duskwuff wrote: post #37
schmidtleonard wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He probably means the civil war. I'd like to point out that the South was only a fan of States Rights exactly insofar as they let them do slavery. The millisecond it came to forcing Northern states to return escaped slaves, they suddenly weren't the same principled supporters of devolving and federating power. Funny how that works.

And just in case it wasn't clear enough already: one of the first acts of the Confederacy was to draft a provisional constitution which explicitly authorized slavery, and which prohibited either Congress or any state from passing laws to the contrary.

States also weren't allow to leave the Confederacy ...

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#49

Post by lesuorac »

rubyfan wrote: post #39
jandrewrogers wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wickard v Filburn rearing its ugly ahead again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

I’m not a legal scholar but this seems pretty bone headed.

Which part?

The "The U.S. government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies." seems like quite the federal overreach never mind the court decision.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#50

Post by lesuorac »

twisteriffic wrote: post #46
lesuorac wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EOs aren't law though. They're guidance for the rest of the executive branch on how to execute the laws written by congress. The Legislative branch (Congress) not the Executive branch (White House) can preempt states.

I don't know if you've heard, but norms don't matter anymore.

Can you guys just read stuff before talking?

> The order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to create an “AI Litigation Task Force” within 30 days whose "sole responsibility shall be to challenge State AI laws" that clash with the Trump administration's vision for light-touch regulation.

The EO isn't about Federal Preemption. Trump's not creating a law to preempt states. So a question about how Federal Preemption is relevant is on point.

Post reply on HN