2 ms·

We wait until we have an actual, real problem. Then we try to fix it. Right now, AI-induced unemployment just isn’t a problem. So it’s extremely likely the ad

We wait until we have an actual, real problem. Then we try to fix it. Right now, AI-induced unemployment just isn’t a problem. So it’s extremely likely the advocates for regulation are AI corporations, rather than reams of unemployed workers.

brookst 2y ago
And before somebody says “we should address problems before they happen” the challenge with AI is we don’t know exactly what problems will happen or what effective regulation would be. It makes sense to say new buildings have to meet fire safety regulations that are based on learnings from past fires. AI is too new; everyone is either guessing or lobbying for personal benefit. We should be vigilant, but I don’t for a second believe the “any regulation is better than nothing” rhetoric from those who stand to gain.
- troupo 2y ago
  > AI is too new; It's not. All the learnings we've had from ML (the mistakes, the failures etc.) are just as applicable to AI.
  - brookst 2y ago
    So what learnings do we have that inform whether it is a good idea to regulate e.g. whether a business can use AI to take customer orders?
    - troupo 2y ago
      You can read through EU AI Act, or read this excellent article about it: https://softwarecrisis.dev/letters/the-truth-about-the-eu-act/ https://softwarecrisis.dev/letters/the-truth-about-the-eu-ac...
xkcd-sucks 2y ago
Maybe overly cynical but "risks" of "AI" going to Congress seems mostly to be a submarine hype thing
dbspin 2y ago
"AI-induced unemployment just isn’t a problem." I'm not sure how you'd test this hypothesis, but it certainly looks like a tonne of the ongoing FAANG layoffs are based on assumptions about a decreased need for low-mid level programmers.
ben_w 2y ago
When governments make decisions in a rush, the decisions are generally not very well thought out. I therefore think it's a good idea to have a plan for AI induced unemployment before people take to the streets because they have no job, no hope of a job, and no money left to pay the bills. I have no idea how far away economic mass unemployment is, and I'm not convinced the current indicators in specific fields (much as it affects those fields) is "it", but I have seen a lot of news stories about governments getting surprised by things everyone was warning them about and they ignored.

brookst 2y ago

And before somebody says “we should address problems before they happen” the challenge with AI is we don’t know exactly what problems will happen or what effective regulation would be. It makes sense to say new buildings have to meet fire safety regulations that are based on learnings from past fires. AI is too new; everyone is either guessing or lobbying for personal benefit. We should be vigilant, but I don’t for a second believe the “any regulation is better than nothing” rhetoric from those who stand to gain.

troupo 2y ago
> AI is too new; It's not. All the learnings we've had from ML (the mistakes, the failures etc.) are just as applicable to AI.
- brookst 2y ago
  So what learnings do we have that inform whether it is a good idea to regulate e.g. whether a business can use AI to take customer orders?
  - troupo 2y ago
    You can read through EU AI Act, or read this excellent article about it: https://softwarecrisis.dev/letters/the-truth-about-the-eu-act/ https://softwarecrisis.dev/letters/the-truth-about-the-eu-ac...

xkcd-sucks 2y ago

Maybe overly cynical but "risks" of "AI" going to Congress seems mostly to be a submarine hype thing

dbspin 2y ago

"AI-induced unemployment just isn’t a problem." I'm not sure how you'd test this hypothesis, but it certainly looks like a tonne of the ongoing FAANG layoffs are based on assumptions about a decreased need for low-mid level programmers.

ben_w 2y ago

When governments make decisions in a rush, the decisions are generally not very well thought out. I therefore think it's a good idea to have a plan for AI induced unemployment before people take to the streets because they have no job, no hope of a job, and no money left to pay the bills. I have no idea how far away economic mass unemployment is, and I'm not convinced the current indicators in specific fields (much as it affects those fields) is "it", but I have seen a lot of news stories about governments getting surprised by things everyone was warning them about and they ignored.