| "This is just a wild exaggeration of what's happening here." Is it? From the article... "Both OpenAI and Anthropic said signing the agreement with the AI Safety Institute will move the needle on defining how the U.S. develops responsible AI rules." From the UK AISI website with whom the data is also shared (their main headline in fact): "Rigorous AI research to enable advanced AI governance" (https://www.aisi.gov.uk/) The reality is that this would be a tremendous waste of time and money if all were just to sate some curiosity... which of course it isn't. Let's look at what the US AISI (part of the Department of Commerce, a regulatory agency) has to say about itself: "
About the U.S. AI Safety Institute huuh The U.S. AI Safety Institute, located within the Department of Commerce at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), was established following the Biden-Harris administration’s 2023 Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence to advance the science of AI safety and address the risks posed by advanced AI systems. It is tasked with developing the testing, evaluations and guidelines that will help accelerate safe AI innovation here in the United States and around the world." -- (https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2024/08/us-ai-safety-i...) So to understand what the US AISI is about, you need to look at that Executive Order: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... "With this Executive Order, the President directs the most sweeping actions ever taken to protect Americans from the potential risks of AI systems" "Require that developers of the most powerful AI systems share their safety test results and other critical information with the U.S. government." There's a fair amount of reasonable stuff in there about national security and engineering bioweapons (dunno why that's singled out) But then we get to other sections... "Protecting Americans’ Privacy" "Advancing Equity and Civil Rights" "Standing Up for Consumers, Patients, and Students" "Supporting Workers" "Promoting Innovation and Competition" etc. While the US AISI many not have direct rule making ability at this point, it is nonetheless an active participant in the process of informing those parts of government which do have such regulatory and legislative authority. And while there is plenty in that executive order that many might agree with, the interpretations of many of those points are inherently political and would not find a meaningful consensus. You might agree with Biden/Harris on the priorities about what constitutes AI safety or danger, but what about the next administration? What if Biden hadn't dropped out and you ended up Trump? As much threat as AI might represent as it develops, I am equally nervous about an unconstrained government seizing opportunities for extending its power beyond its traditional reach including in areas of freedom of speech and thought. |