Technology

59111 readers

3324 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

361

Outcry from big AI firms over California AI “kill switch” bill (arstechnica.com)

submitted 5 months ago by photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world

114 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

AI is already regulated. Just because something is new (to the public) does not mean that laws don't apply to it. We don't need regulation for the sake of regulation.

There's a lot of AI regulation that may become necessary one day. For example, maybe we should have a right to an AI assistant, like there is a right to legal counsel today. Should we be thinking about the minimum compute to assign to public defense AIs?

This is for models that cost 100 million dollars to train.

Or take a certain amount of compute. Right now, this covers no models. Between progress and inflation, it will eventually cover all models. At some point between no and then, the makers of such laws will be cursed as AI illiterate fools, like we curse computer illiterate boomers today.

Think about this example you gave: Cars are regulated

We regulate cars, and implicitly the software in it. We do not regulate software in the abstract. We don't monitor mechanics or engineers. People are encouraged to learn and to become educated.

[–] gbzm@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Of course you regulate software in the abstract. Have you ever heard of the regulations concerning onboard navigation software in planes? It's really strict, and mechanics and engineers that work on that are monitored.

Better exemple: do you think people who work on the targeting algorithms in missiles are allowed to chat about the specifics of their algorithms with chat gpt? Because they aren't.