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

US AI Action Plan

ai.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 672 posts

Re: US AI Action Plan

#531

Post by rwmj »

patcon wrote: post #524
rwmj wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely a risk, and already happening, but I presume mostly closed source AIs are used for this? Like, people using the ChatGPT APIs to generate spam; or Grok just doing its normal thing. Don't see how the open vs closed debate has much to do with it.

You can't see how a hosted private model (that can monitor usage and adapt mechanisms to that) has a different risk profile than an open weight model (that is unmonitorable and becomes more and more runnable on more and more hardware every month)? One can become more controlled and wrangle in the edge-cases, and the other has exploding edges. You can have your politics around the value of open source models, but I fi…

You're making several optimistic assumptions: The first is that closed source companies are interested in controlling the risk of using their technology. This is obviously wrong: Facebook didn't care its main platform enabled literal genocide. xAI doesn't care about the outputs of their model being truthful.

The other assumption is that nefarious actors will care about any of this. They'll use what's available, or make their own models, or maybe even steal models (if China had an incredible AI, don't you think other countries would be trying to steal the weights?). Bad actors don't care about moral positions, strangely enough.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#532

Post by DonHopkins »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #408
wredcoll wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if this counts as amazing optimism or just straight up blinders if that's your takeaway compared to the emphasis placed on non-renewable energy and government enforced ideology.

Current AIs are anything but politically neutral.

[dead]

Re: US AI Action Plan

#533

Post by shortrounddev2 »

rwmj wrote: post #520
shortrounddev2 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk of AI is that they are used for industrial scale misinformation

Definitely a risk, and already happening, but I presume mostly closed source AIs are used for this? Like, people using the ChatGPT APIs to generate spam; or Grok just doing its normal thing. Don't see how the open vs closed debate has much to do with it.

Governments are able to regulate companies like OpenAI and impose penalties for allowing their customers to abuse their APIs, but are unable to do so if Russia's Internet Research Agency is running the exact same models on domestic Russian servers to interfere in US elections.

Of course, the US is a captured state now and so the current US Government has no problem with Russian election interference so long as it benefits them

Re: US AI Action Plan

#534

Post by atoav »

2600 wrote: post #523
softwaredoug wrote: post #504

Obviously AI is a massive and important area for economic growth. But so is clean energy. And both right now are at an inflection point. It seems the US is going to thrive with the former but naively stick our heads in the sands with the latter. We’ll cede economic leadership, and wonder in 20 years what happened as other countries lead in energy. Even worse, the administrations stance will encourage US energy compan…

It's part of the current administration's energy agenda, President Trump signed executive orders a couple of months ago, to increase nuclear energy capacity by 400% in the next 25 years, revising regulations, and expediting review and approval of reactor projects, which seems like the most effective strategy for expanding clean energy production.

A certain group of people keep saying that. But that particular idea of "clean" nuclear does not price in the 10.000 years of safe storage of nuclear waste materials (for the most dangerous HLW materials this number can go up to 100.000 years). Do you and your 3500 generations of ancestors volunteer to do this? Then it is cheap and clean. Otherwise it is yet another instance of "privatize the gains and socialize the externalities".

(And let's ignore the fact that humanity barely managed to organize anything that held even a mere 1000 years)

Re: US AI Action Plan

#535

Post by nsypteras »

"Counter Chinese Influence in International Governance Bodies" and grouping them in with US "adversaries" and "rivals" is quite undiplomatic language to throw in under "Lead in International AI Diplomacy and Security" section. Diplomacy with China should be an important part of this initiative but will inevitably be bungled.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#536

Post by AdamN »

omcnoe wrote: post #366
breakingcups wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, for one, dont't agree with the idea that Europe is too regulatory and bureaucratic. I welcome my rights as a consumer and human being being safeguarded at the cost of a small amount of profit.

Registering a company in Germany: you must visit a notary in person with your incorporation documents, and sit there while the notary reads aloud your incorporation to you. This is to "ensure that you fully understand the contract" even as a foreigner who doesn't speak corporate-legalese-German. Minimum capital deposit of €25,000. Registering a company in US (Delaware) can be achieved in as little as 1 hour. Getting…

That's a Germany issue. Getting married in Denmark is straightforward and registering a company in Lithuania is also straightforward. There's nothing European about that issue - it's just how Germany handles this stuff.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#537

Post by pyuser583 »

> AI is the first digital service in modern life that challenges America to build vastly greater energy generation than we have today.

I'm glad it's focusing on the challenges that are proven, not speculative.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#538

Post by shortrounddev2 »

nsypteras wrote: post #535

"Counter Chinese Influence in International Governance Bodies" and grouping them in with US "adversaries" and "rivals" is quite undiplomatic language to throw in under "Lead in International AI Diplomacy and Security" section. Diplomacy with China should be an important part of this initiative but will inevitably be bungled.

China is an adversary of the West, and leading in international security means posing a challenge (or, in an ideal world, a better alternative) to Chinese influence on the international stage.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#539

Post by DonHopkins »

logicchains wrote: post #527
saubeidl wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as politically neutral. Whatever you perceive as such is just a reflection of your own ideology.

There absolutely is; formally speaking, statements can be categorised into normative, saying how things should be, and positive, saying how things are. A politically neutral AI would avoid making any explicit or implicit normative statements.

AI simply not openly and proudly declaring itself MechaHitler while spreading White Supremacist lies and Racist ideology would be one small step in the right direction.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#540

Post by Karawebnetwork »

Mobius01 wrote: post #3

Removing Red Tape and Onerous Regulation Ensure that Frontier AI Protects Free Speech and American Values Encourage Open-Source and Open-Weight AI Enable AI Adoption Empower American Workers in the Age of AI Support Next-Generation Manufacturing Invest in AI-Enabled Science Build World-Class Scientific Datasets Advance the Science of AI 9 Invest in AI Interpretability, Control, and Robustness Breakthroughs Build an A…

> Removing Red Tape and Onerous Regulation Ensure that Frontier AI Protects Free Speech

Yet at the same time,

> Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government [...] LLMs shall be neutral, nonpartisan tools that do not manipulate responses in favor of ideological dogmas such as DEI. [...] DEI includes the suppression or distortion of factual information about race or sex; manipulation of racial or sexual representation in model outputs; incorporation of concepts like critical race theory, transgenderism, unconscious bias, intersectionality, and systemic racism; and discrimination on the basis of race or sex. [1]

I don't understand how free speech can be protected while suppressing topics such as "unconscious bias" and "discrimination".

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/prev...

Post reply on HN