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

81–90 of 288 posts

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#81

Post by oceanplexian »

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #74
roenxi wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> we need a hyper-productive world where someone working a few hours a year generates enough wealth to secure a comfortable lifestyle up there with the best of them. This is naive, productivity increases had decoupled from compensation a long time ago. See https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ for example. AI certainly can create wealth, and in fact already did (hey NVDA), but somehow that did not trickle down. I…

Why then, outside of Norway, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the UAE (All of which are tiny countries, and at least two of them are Petrostates), does the United States have the world's highest median income with a population of over 342 million people?

The typical American is insanely wealthy by global standards.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#83

Post by Alex2037 »

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.

[flagged]

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#85

Post by yks »

dmix wrote: post #69
techblueberry wrote: post #4

A win for states rights!

Just like the last time Trump was president he is far from a traditional conservative regarding small government. People pretend the 2010 tea party is the same thing as Trump as some sort of gotcha, but he's never been that way. He's always been very assertive regarding expanding executive and federal power.

No one is surprised about that guy, those comments usually point out how "the 2010 tea party", and everyone else from the decades, if not centuries, of the conservative milieu, are suddenly all in on this.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#86

Post by SilverElfin »

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.

It is definitely naked corruption. Lobbying was always around, but I would say that with this administration things are a lot more transactional and a lot more in the open. Companies like Palantir and Anduril and others are being gifted contracts all over the place - that’s money we taxpayers are losing.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#87

Post by viccis »

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.

Just another step towards Russian style naked oligarchy.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#88

Post by TylerE »

sterlind wrote: post #71
lesuorac wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

the Task Force can try to challenge state AI laws. they can file whatever lawsuits they want. they will probably lose most of their suits, because there's very little ground for challenging state AI regulations.

Those suits will be seen by the worst judges the Heritage Foundation could ram through. I would not be nearly so confident of a sane outcome.

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#89

Post by josh_p »

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…

Yes, and..

Each EO tests the waters a bit more with what the public and other branches will tolerate. As we’ve seen with numerous orders already, Congress and business will comply early because they think it will benefit them.

Trump thinks himself a king. He acts like it. He’s attempting to normalize his behavior. He can’t deal with the legislature because it turns out white supremacy isn’t that popular. Who knew?

Re: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

#90

Post by Hnrobert42 »

sterlind wrote: post #73
cdrnsf wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EOs also aren't laws, they're instructions on how to execute policy. This administration treats them as the former. Everything they do, however, is petty, cruel and nakedly corrupt while also being marred by a total lack of competence.

I think the Administration is likely to get its toys taken away soon. the Major Questions Doctrine, the end of Chevron deference, the mandate for Article III courts from Jarkesy , have been building towards this for a while. the capstone in this program of weakening the administrative state, overturning Humphrey's Executor when Trump v. Slaughter is decided, will likely revive the Intelligible Principle Doctrine, as…

I fear by reducing control over executive power to one, squishy standard like the Intelligible Principle Doctrine will let SCOTUS pick and choose which laws have intelligible principles. When conservatives are in power, suddenly all laws will have them. And swing back when liberals are in control.
Post reply on HN