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

581–590 of 672 posts

Re: US AI Action Plan

#581

Post by hardolaf »

dingnuts wrote: post #555
atoav wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My understanding is that every other form of energy production has similar or worse concerns, including renewables due to the materials used to build and operate and decommission solar panels and windmills. The argument you're making about waste has even led to the decommissioning of nuclear in Germany to be replaced with coal... burning coal also produces radioactive fly ash. Everything has tradeoffs! I guess we cou…

Renewables outside of solar farms where solar is installed at ground level, also have a significantly higher death and serious injury rate than nuclear does per GWH produced even after including the use of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons testing in the numbers to make nuclear look worse.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#582

Post by [deleted] »

andsoitis wrote: post #307
dwaltrip wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't neutral on energy sources or simply agnostic to environmental impact. They are anti-renewable, because renewable = woke. Tribal politics at its best.

> They Who is the “they” in your sentence?

[deleted]

Re: US AI Action Plan

#583

Post by dwaltrip »

andsoitis wrote: post #307
dwaltrip wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't neutral on energy sources or simply agnostic to environmental impact. They are anti-renewable, because renewable = woke. Tribal politics at its best.

> They Who is the “they” in your sentence?

The current administration, maga folks, the freshly anti-woke techies. Etc

Top level comment was referencing the energy policies mentioned in the linked site, which of course left out renewables entirely.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#584

Post by palmfacehn »

AdamN wrote: post #530
sbelskie wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the government should step in to dictate what neutrality means?

Isn't that why we have government? We have judges to make the final say on right and wrong and what the punishments are for transgressions, legislatures to make laws and allocate money based on the needs of the constituents, and an executive function to carry out the will of the stakeholders. Clearly there are terrible governments but if it's not government tackling these issues then there will be limited control by…

Does the individual consumer have any agency in which AI services he chooses to consume?

As I understood the original premises of the US gov, it was to be constitutionally limited in scope. Now I know that ship has sailed a long time ago, but I don't think it follows that we have a gov. to centrally plan AI content as right or wrong.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#585

Post by palmfacehn »

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.

>...and positive, saying how things are

This presumes that the AI has access to objective reality. Instead, the AI has access to subjective reports filed by fallible humans, about the state of the world. Even if we could concede that an AI might observe the world on its own terms, the language it might use to describe the world as it perceives it would be subjectively defined by humans.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#586

Post by whodidntante »

Frieren wrote: post #390
HSO wrote: post #334

after the pandemic, i see the pattern everywhere. newsflash: it doesnt matter what you "plan". you wont do it. because you cant. it´s called state incapacity. you´re institutionally incapable. prediction: nothing will follow from this except the low effort stuff (i.e. nothing but speeches and expenses)

> prediction: nothing will follow from this except the low effort stuff (i.e. nothing but speeches and expenses) Hundred million contracts with zero results. Conservative ideology is based on the idea that certain people is just above others and they deserve more for free meanwhile working class health expenses are a luxury and need to be cut down.

I do not know why you need to bring political ideolgy into this. It is very easy to find contracts put together and run by Democrats that only serve to increase administrative bloat.

One example: $42.5B in the infrastructure bill to expand high speed internet access to rural communities.

Four years later, this funding is still in proposal stages, with final proposals due (not approved) at the end of this year. Absolutely nothing has been spent on broadband access, and it is likely to take at least another year or more before any real spending starts.

In the meantime, what has happened so far: - $810M spend on admin costs. Over $200M a year to run a program that does nothing. - there is a cap of 2% or $850M for admin costs, so there is already legislation on the way to exapnd this cap so that the program can continue.Admin costs will only increase after projects are underway because they need to be closely monitored. - Inflation has been 25% since this was approved, inflation for internet infrastructure has been 50%, so already, only half of the infrastructure envisioned will be implemented, but it will end up being more like 25% will see the light of day due to inflation and admin costs.

There are many other examples. Look up EV charging stations. Look were ARPA funds have gone.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#587

Post by landl0rd »

DonHopkins wrote: post #547
landl0rd wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most frontier LLMs skew somewhere on the libleft quadrant of the political compass. This includes grok 4 btw. This is probably because American "respectable" media has a consistent bias in this direction. I don't really care about this with media. But media outlets are not "gatekeepers" to the extent that LLMs are, so this is probably a bad thing with them. We should either have a range of models that are biased in d…

[flagged]

[dead]

Re: US AI Action Plan

#589

Post by saubeidl »

palmfacehn wrote: post #585
logicchains wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>...and positive, saying how things are This presumes that the AI has access to objective reality. Instead, the AI has access to subjective reports filed by fallible humans, about the state of the world. Even if we could concede that an AI might observe the world on its own terms, the language it might use to describe the world as it perceives it would be subjectively defined by humans.

That is exactly it. Humans are inherently subjective beings, seeing everything through their ideology, and as a result LLMs are, too.

They will always be a computer representation of the ideology that trained it.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#590

Post by nickpsecurity »

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #495

Important follow-up page to the US AI Action Page: "PREVENTING WOKE AI IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/prev... > In the AI context, 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,…

It's worth mentioning because the AI developers have been using alignment training to make AI's see the world through the lens of intersectionality. That ranges from censoring what those philosophies would censor to simply presenting answers like they would. Some models actually got dumber as they prioritized indoctrination as "safety" training. It appears that many employees in the companies think that way, too.

Most of the world, and a huge chunk of America, thinks in different ways. Many are not aware the AI's are being built this way either. So, we want AI's that don't have a philosophy opposite of ours. We'd like them to either be more neutral or customizable to the users' preferences.

Given the current state, the first steps are to reverse the existing trend (eg political fine-tuning) and use open weights we can further customize. Later, maybe purge highly-biased stuff out of training sets when making new models. I find certain keywords, whether liberal or conservative, often hint they're going to push politics.

Post reply on HN