[swatcoder]

Mature corporations need liability protection in order to operate. As "AI" tools become widespread, they're going to want and then require assurance that liability for using those tools falls on somebody else.

A healthy regulatory body provides for that by setting standards and holding the relatively few vendors liable for conformance rather than the countless users.

It does interfere with innovation for those vendors doing foundational research, but it enables richly funded innovation in applications. It seems like we're at a point where lots of people want to start working on applications using current/near technology; failure to provide them the liability protections they need is what will stifle practical, commercial innovation and would leave AI applications in the hands of the few specialist technology companies who are confident in their models and have the wealth to absorb any liability issues that arise.

[jjk166]

I don't want the companies recklessly operating AIs protected. The capabilities of AI aren't dangerous, only their applications, and those who want to commercialize AI should have to demonstrate that they are using them responsibly. If they're not ready to do that yet, then the field is not mature enough yet to warrant fostering commercialization.