3 ms·

If AI is going to be regulated those regulations should be debated in public and based upon the resulting laws passed by the legislative process and not determ

by tssva 4mo ago

If AI is going to be regulated those regulations should be debated in public and based upon the resulting laws passed by the legislative process and not determined by royal decree.

andsoitis 4mo ago
The previous administration did same: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14110 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14110 So if we’re going to be rational about it, I think it is better to critique the substance of the EO rather than its mere existence, which is common practice: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or... So in that spirit, what do you think of the substance?
- _aavaa_ 4mo ago
  No, we can be rational and critique its existence. Especially given the current administration’s track record.
- jMyles 4mo ago
  Well sure, the previous administration also abused executive authority. That's not news or controversial in any way. How does that make it better for the current administration to do it?
  - andsoitis 4mo ago
    Executive Orders are a common practice across presidencies, not just the current and previous: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or... Whether that’s abuse or not I am not equipped to say with any confidence. I’d be curious to understand why you think this particular case is one of abusing executive authority and when an EO might not be such a case?
    - jMyles 4mo ago
      Well of course as you point out, EOs have gone from single digits, to double-digits, to thousands, and now down to hundreds per POTUS. Contextually, I think it's a very reasonable (and commonly held, in the academic world) take that the EOs have also gotten far more legislative and legal. This is partly (but only partly) owing to administrative deference delegated by congress. It's also somewhat specific to technological innovations, which some EOs have sought to occupy the field on before the lumbering process of congress can respond. And it's not limited to published EOs either, but many executive actions, especially in the White House OLC. This was very obvious during the W. Bush administration as regards the (Lotus Domino) email system in place at that time (which was the topic of my thesis, so it kinda serves as a temporal landmark in my consideration of this issue, but I do genuinely think it was a new frontier in executive overreach and obfuscation of interests in terms of how the White House has approached its interactions with the internet).
- filoleg 4mo ago
  > The previous administration did the same Yeah, and I hated that move in the exact same way I hate the one this thread is about.
gowld 4mo ago
Executive orders don't regulate AI. They only apply to the Federal Government operations.

by tssva 4mo ago

If AI is going to be regulated those regulations should be debated in public and based upon the resulting laws passed by the legislative process and not determined by royal decree.

andsoitis 4mo ago

The previous administration did same: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14110 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14110 So if we’re going to be rational about it, I think it is better to critique the substance of the EO rather than its mere existence, which is common practice: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or... So in that spirit, what do you think of the substance?

_aavaa_ 4mo ago
No, we can be rational and critique its existence. Especially given the current administration’s track record.
jMyles 4mo ago
Well sure, the previous administration also abused executive authority. That's not news or controversial in any way. How does that make it better for the current administration to do it?
- andsoitis 4mo ago
  Executive Orders are a common practice across presidencies, not just the current and previous: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-or... Whether that’s abuse or not I am not equipped to say with any confidence. I’d be curious to understand why you think this particular case is one of abusing executive authority and when an EO might not be such a case?
  - jMyles 4mo ago
    Well of course as you point out, EOs have gone from single digits, to double-digits, to thousands, and now down to hundreds per POTUS. Contextually, I think it's a very reasonable (and commonly held, in the academic world) take that the EOs have also gotten far more legislative and legal. This is partly (but only partly) owing to administrative deference delegated by congress. It's also somewhat specific to technological innovations, which some EOs have sought to occupy the field on before the lumbering process of congress can respond. And it's not limited to published EOs either, but many executive actions, especially in the White House OLC. This was very obvious during the W. Bush administration as regards the (Lotus Domino) email system in place at that time (which was the topic of my thesis, so it kinda serves as a temporal landmark in my consideration of this issue, but I do genuinely think it was a new frontier in executive overreach and obfuscation of interests in terms of how the White House has approached its interactions with the internet).
filoleg 4mo ago
> The previous administration did the same Yeah, and I hated that move in the exact same way I hate the one this thread is about.

gowld 4mo ago

Executive orders don't regulate AI. They only apply to the Federal Government operations.