The clock is ticking…

Well this is baloney.

Ask me about the rivers that caught on fire because of poor regulation. Or the Boeing airplanes that fell out of the sky because they were allowed to self-regulate. Let’s ask the 20,000 people who died in Bhopal, India because a pesticide plant hadn’t been inspected recently.

Maybe we want to ask the thalidomide children how they feel about “regulation”? And if we can get them in the same room, let’s ask Charles Ponzi’s clients how that “no SEC” turned out for them.

Ooh, wait, I know, I know. Let’s talk to the regulators who weren’t regulating before the 2008 banking crisis and see how they think it turned out. Even famous libertarian Alan Greenspan was shocked, shocked I tell you, that banks would do stupid things if they weren’t watched over.

The absence of good regulation led directly to the Deepwater Horizon disaster, Luckily there was no regulation at all at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, so I bet the workers there are enjoying their freedoms. And that lack of regulations for having enough lifeboats to serve all passengers on the Titanic turned out well, too, eh?

Nom the simple fact is that regulations do not simply fall out of the sky. They are always, and in every case, reactions to lack of regulations which cause disasters of one sort or another: financial, economic, health, and death being the most prominent examples.

Of course the captains of industry hate hate hate regulations, because “WAAAHHH! They want to tell me how to run my business.” My response is “If you had run your business responsibly then nobody would be bothering you by instituting rules. But you didn’t, so we will.”

Baloney squared, if there is such a thing.

11 Likes

I don’t think so. There are plenty of people who think all regulations are bad. I think they’re bonkers.

I’d like a thoughtful measured approach too, but I’m not hopeful that will happen. There’s no doubt the EU has fallen behind in buildout and compute. They’re approach to enterprise and sovereign AI is a direct outcome of their tighter regulations. If…and that’s a big if…regulations tighten around the globe, their weakness could become a strength.

5 Likes

I think you are missing the point. Ultimately, in most cases, really bad corporate behavior has a consequence. The consumer or the government or both react. For government regulatory policy, it can go on for far longer and be far more reaching because it is the ultimate authority, absent contravening action by voters.

The current Tariff policy is perfect example. Look how far reaching and potentially destructive that policy was to private businesses and other nations around the world. There is no single corporation that has that kind of reach and impact.

Again, these are tired strawman arguments of taking criticism to its extreme. The support of careful regulatory policy or the concern that it might stifle innovation in the AI space is not opposition to all regulatory action. Just like opposition to some tax policy, is not an endorsement against all taxation. But, it’s a way to try and shift my argument and then argue against that extreme example.

But tell me, what regulatory action should the US take in terms of AI at this point? Please be specific and what would the benefit be to the public and the consequences and to its long term development?

2 Likes

Probably not, the Govt tends to react during a crisis with major policy and regulatory changes, which is the worst way to do it.

1 Like

Everytime this administration has overreached, there was no checks and balances. The China hatred is at times comical.

It is not China, but our own government does most harm to us. But China is a nice distraction.

6 Likes

There are regulations that have common sense and science backing them. There are people currently in the Trump Admin that are destroying these regulations with the support of the of the Republicans in Congress. The super majority of the people (including Republicans) in the country are against the destruction of these regulations and are feed up with the Trump Admin. So the only recourse is the midterm elections.

But with all the recent Supreme Court Decisions about elections and Republicans in Congress trying to destroy the laws and regulations for free and fair elections, will the will of the people be served?

Jaak

2 Likes

There have been 150 or more cases either temporarily or permanently halting actions and policies by the current administration. There are more than 500 active cases taking issue with policies and actions that are ongoing and yet to be resolved.

As to China, I have no idea what you are referring to and it has no bearing on the discussion other than the difference in how AI is applied or restricted by various Govt. The greatest threats to the US will always come from within. It’s hardly an original thought and the genesis of the idea goes back to Lincoln’s speech in 1838.

In my mind, the lack of AI policy is a good thing for now. It’s not an endorsement of the administration’s overall scorecard or its position on china.

1 Like

Some of them do. Some of them don’t or they outlive their original purpose. What would be the common sense regulatory approach to AI development in the US?

BS there are a myriad of perfect regulations.

Your choices for us are all bad.

1 Like

Criminalize deepfakes. It would do nothing to stifle innovation and it would go a long way to protecting truth as well as individuals.

10 Likes

An angry man at the lunch counter got real the other day with me. Told me he can not tell what the truth was any longer. He’s big support of the man’s. I did not rush to tell him it was all lies from the man. Why bother? Why rub it in? I let it sink in that he began to realize it was lies. He sadly said he only needs them to tell the truth. He just can’t tell any longer.

F45 you do not know the truth at all.

1 Like

The EU and US have the same assets per capita, in the $300k to $500k area, depending on north versus south. This is a make-believe that the EU has fallen behind. It is a pathetic need to propagate mistruths.

The bigger point we need to run our country on our needs. Looking elsewhere is meaningless distraction.

Our needs are to have our corporations work for us. Not the shareholders at a cost to us. That is dishonest.

It’s a valid point. We have the Take it Down Act and the Defiance Act along with a slew of already existing Federal and State laws that either require disclosure or are meant to address identity theft through criminal and then civil penalties. What specifically needs to be added that doesn’t tread on what is intended as parody?

Just about everything in policy is a trade off, it’s usually just a failure by policymakers to recognize what they are. What is the perfect regulatory stance on AI in the US?

Be specific to support your case. What is a trade off and what did the policymakers miss? Otherwise you sound like a parrot.

adding 12 minutes later. You were typing away to respond. Then you walked away?

Markets just closed, got distracted, very big up day. I was going to respond with policy examples but it seems a waste of time. Let’s stay focused on the topic, what would be the perfect or let’s even settle for the sensible AI policy by the US Govt?
I don’t have a full grasp of both the positive and negative long term consequences of AI advancement. Until that’s clear or someone presents a reason why it needs to be regulated and what form that should take, I think it’s best to avoid harming what may be an important technological revolution. I hardly think that’s parroting but just a recognition that the future is unclear and with it, how it should be harnessed and who should decide it.

So you have zero examples? You just say these things?

A sensible policy for AI? Limiting how many DC can go into construction in the US. Apple and Microsoft/Intel will catch up and pass the DC crazy at much lower costs. The PC/MAC are much better deals with AI onboard than the cloud nonsense. Or they will be soon.

Put DC in space. No expert here, but space is the ultimate heat sink. The sun is the closest we can get to free energy. Support SpaceX to do so. Government money.

Political deepfakes. Pols don’t enjoy the same protections (right or wrong) that the rest of us may enjoy.

3 Likes

Florida found a reason -

Remove Section 230 civil protections for companies selling AI products. Aggressively pursue criminal charges when they’re negligent.

3 Likes

In what way is it a major important technological revolution? Please say more. You say things with nothing behind them.