3 ms·
I think the real issue here is that we’re trying to apply laws made by humans for humans to something entirely new and not well understood: LLMs. This won’t be
by maronato 3y ago
I think the real issue here is that we’re trying to apply laws made by humans for humans to something entirely new and not well understood: LLMs.
This won’t be something we’ll cleanly solve using current regulation.
- wilg 3y agoI agree, but of course national legislation is like impossible now due to a certain obstructionist political party.
- snickerbockers 3y ago[assuming you mean America] as long as there're only two parties they're both equally obstructionist.
- wilg 3y agoI do and that's wrong.
- hn_acker 3y agoYou should be more clear about the topics of legislation in question. In matters involving internet service providers in the US, the Democratic party in Congress generally doesn't bother to propose internet laws either way, but the Republican party tends to strip away the FCC's regulatory authority and actively oppose attempts to bring a fraction back [1][2]. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/ted-cruz-wants-to-stop-the-fcc-from-updating-data-breach-notification-rules/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/ted-cruz-wants-t... [2] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/01/fcc-to-halt-sign-ups-for-internet-discounts-as-republicans-threaten-funding/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/01/fcc-to-halt-sign... Is either party attempting to obstruct regulations on AI training or AI usage? At the moment, I don't think so [3]. [3] https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/13/schumer-senate-ai-policy-00115794 https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/13/schumer-senate-ai-p...
- snickerbockers 3y agoI don't see any reason why LLMs need their own laws, fundamentally it's just another computer program.