3 ms·
I think your model for how laws get written is wrong. Among civilians, AI is more like we are in the 1930s with airplane clubs--advancing technology out of the
by xbar 6y ago
I think your model for how laws get written is wrong.
Among civilians, AI is more like we are in the 1930s with airplane clubs--advancing technology out of the love of the idea. Ethical questions are important, but the harms do not seem significant enough to regulate before experimenting.
Among the military, it's more like we are in the 1950s with the US/USSR nuclear arms race. The (real or perceived) need to drive AI technology without regard to ethics whatsoever comes from an analysis of the opponent which says they are not regarding ethics.
There are no laws for civilians regarding AI.
There are no treaties for countries regarding AI.
And there won't be until after someone gets hurt.
This is the normal model for laws.
- ianmcgowan 6y agoThe question is does this model work for potential civilization-ending technologies like AI, nano, geo-engineering or gene-editing? Should research that has a very-very low (but non-zero) chance of ending us all be regulated? Would that regulation even lower the chance?
- Datenstrom 6y agoThere are already export regulations on AI in the US[1], Europe is proposing some heavy restrictions[2], and there have been local bans on some uses already[3][4]. [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/5/21050508/us-export-ban-ai-software-china-geospatial-analysis https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/5/21050508/us-export-ban-ai-... [2]: https://www.wired.com/story/europes-proposed-limits-ai-global-consequences/ https://www.wired.com/story/europes-proposed-limits-ai-globa... [3]: https://www.wired.com/story/portlands-face-recognition-ban-twist-smart-cities/ https://www.wired.com/story/portlands-face-recognition-ban-t... [4]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/us/facial-recognition-ban-san-francisco.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/us/facial-recognition-ban...