4 ms·

I can't help but feel that any attempts at regulating AI will just mean that the breakthroughs will happen in other countries.

alasdair_ 3y ago
The US has some of the strictest drug regulations and yet it’s home to most of the biggest drug makers. The US and the EU have some of the strictest aircraft regulations and yet Boeing and Airbus are the world leaders. Sure, people can build gpu farms in Somalia if they want to, but I doubt they will unless the regulation is so draconian that it completely stifles all progress.
- scarface74 3y ago
  Yes because the US allows drug companies to charge outrageous prices for drugs that they then sell to other countries cheaply. Opposite anecdote as far as the EU. They are the first to regulate tech and no major tech company has come out of Europe.
- mahathu 3y ago
  What about China and Russia?
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    Since your asking the question, why do you bring them up ?
chefandy 3y ago
I guess I don't see what the problem is. Are you worried about this happening from a economic perspective, like "we should let private industry do whatever dangerous or immoral thing it wants lest we risk losing the competitive edge in said dangerous or immoral markets," or a cynical one like "well if someone's going to fuck up the world it might as well be us?" It's not like we must either stop in our tracks or allow every coked-up startup founder to do whatever they think will get them on the cover of Forbes. Also, pursuing this tech with wanton abandon won't stop, say, China from progressing with their own efforts.
- krona 3y ago
  Isn't the problem that if the risk is entirely hypothetical, you can't define a limiting principal to any hypothetical regulation? It reminds me of the Vulnerable World Hypothesis - that at any moment someone could invent something so dangerous that it destroys humanity. Given enough time and technological development this outcome becomes inevitable, and ergo we must put brain implants in every child to limit creativity. Do you see the problem?
  - chefandy 3y ago
    a) The US Government uses policy to mitigate hypothetical risk all the time. b) Many of the problems AI may bring about are standard human problems that know how to measure and address, but we likely haven't seen them on this scale. For example, many people reasonably reckon that this new technology will put a lot of white collar workers out of work. That's not some amorphous newfangled philosophical problem-- we can address these problems through policy.
    - srslack 3y ago
      >For example, many people reasonably reckon that this new technology will put a lot of white collar workers out of work. That didn't seem to be a problem when it happened to blue collars. In fact, you could say that it was deliberately legislated.
      - chefandy 3y ago
        I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue here. It was, in fact, a huge problem from a humanitarian perspective and the state of rust belt cities is a shining example of what happens when we ignore these forces. We, as a society, hung those people out to dry and the current batch of workers doesn't even have the meager protections afforded to some factory workers by their union affiliation. If it was deliberately legislated for, that's a really great example of what we should not do in the future.
        3y ago

alasdair_ 3y ago

The US has some of the strictest drug regulations and yet it’s home to most of the biggest drug makers. The US and the EU have some of the strictest aircraft regulations and yet Boeing and Airbus are the world leaders. Sure, people can build gpu farms in Somalia if they want to, but I doubt they will unless the regulation is so draconian that it completely stifles all progress.

scarface74 3y ago
Yes because the US allows drug companies to charge outrageous prices for drugs that they then sell to other countries cheaply. Opposite anecdote as far as the EU. They are the first to regulate tech and no major tech company has come out of Europe.
mahathu 3y ago
What about China and Russia?
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  Since your asking the question, why do you bring them up ?

chefandy 3y ago

I guess I don't see what the problem is. Are you worried about this happening from a economic perspective, like "we should let private industry do whatever dangerous or immoral thing it wants lest we risk losing the competitive edge in said dangerous or immoral markets," or a cynical one like "well if someone's going to fuck up the world it might as well be us?" It's not like we must either stop in our tracks or allow every coked-up startup founder to do whatever they think will get them on the cover of Forbes. Also, pursuing this tech with wanton abandon won't stop, say, China from progressing with their own efforts.

krona 3y ago
Isn't the problem that if the risk is entirely hypothetical, you can't define a limiting principal to any hypothetical regulation? It reminds me of the Vulnerable World Hypothesis - that at any moment someone could invent something so dangerous that it destroys humanity. Given enough time and technological development this outcome becomes inevitable, and ergo we must put brain implants in every child to limit creativity. Do you see the problem?
- chefandy 3y ago
  a) The US Government uses policy to mitigate hypothetical risk all the time. b) Many of the problems AI may bring about are standard human problems that know how to measure and address, but we likely haven't seen them on this scale. For example, many people reasonably reckon that this new technology will put a lot of white collar workers out of work. That's not some amorphous newfangled philosophical problem-- we can address these problems through policy.
  - srslack 3y ago
    >For example, many people reasonably reckon that this new technology will put a lot of white collar workers out of work. That didn't seem to be a problem when it happened to blue collars. In fact, you could say that it was deliberately legislated.
    - chefandy 3y ago
      I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue here. It was, in fact, a huge problem from a humanitarian perspective and the state of rust belt cities is a shining example of what happens when we ignore these forces. We, as a society, hung those people out to dry and the current batch of workers doesn't even have the meager protections afforded to some factory workers by their union affiliation. If it was deliberately legislated for, that's a really great example of what we should not do in the future.
      - 3y ago