Both Democrats and Republicans are in agreement that the quickly developing AI technology should be regulated by the federal government.
Despite requests from Democrats and Republicans in Congress as well as some tech moguls for government participation, the administration of President Joe Biden has remained reticent regarding whether or not it is concerned about the rapid development of artificial intelligence and whether or not it should be controlled at the national level.
White House press assistant Karine Jean-Pierre told Fox News Digital on Wednesday morning that the National Security Council is the “primary forum” for President Joe Biden to discuss issues of national security and foreign policy with his or her top advisors and cabinet officials. This statement was made by Jean-Pierre. (NSC).
Fox News reached out to the National Security Council (NSC) for a statement on how the Biden administration would respond to a demand to halt artificial intelligence (AI) research and development. The National Security Council has not provided a response, despite repeated assurances to the opposite.
The White House has remained inactive despite calls from prominent figures in the tech industry, such as Elon Musk of Tesla and Steve Wozniak of Apple, to stop the development of sophisticated AI for a period of six months due to “profound risks to society and humanity.” If
If this doesn’t happen quickly, researchers have been urged to “immediately stop training AI systems more powerful than GPT-4 for at least 6 months,” and governments have been urged to “step in and put a stop to it.”
The Future of Life Institute published a declaration that was signed by over a thousand people, including Elon Musk, contending that autonomous authorities should establish principles for the future of the security of artificial intelligence systems. According to OpenAI, “human-level performance” can be seen in their most recent deep learning model, GPT-4, when compared to a number of professional and scientific benchmarks. This conclusion was reached after analyzing the model’s performance in relation to the benchmarks.
The statement claimed that we shouldn’t develop artificial intelligence (AI) systems until we know for certain that they will help people and that the dangers they bring can be controlled. Until then, they shouldn’t be developed.
Since the release of Microsoft’s ChatGPT a year ago, competitors have been racing to develop equivalent large-scale language models, and businesses have started incorporating generative AI models into their own products and services. Microsoft led the pack in this race.
The letter advised against using the cutting-edge tools that are currently being developed in artificial intelligence laboratories because at this point in time “no one can understand, predict, or reliably control” them. The following group of tech specialists is concerned that fake news generated by AI could spread untruths and misinformation, and that AI programs could one day overcome the intelligence of humans and make humans redundant.
Signatories of the petition, which include prominent members of the AI community such as Yoshua Bengio and Stuart Russell and Emad Mostaque, CEO of Stability AI, argue that advancements in artificial intelligence in general should not be stopped. Instead, they are demanding an end to what they call the “dangerous race toward ever-larger black-box models with emergent capabilities.”
Despite the fact that the White House hasn’t said much about potentially unsettling developments in AI, members of both parties in the 118th Congress appear to have found common ground in advocating for regulation of AI. This is despite the fact that the White House hasn’t said much about regulating AI.
“I think what you have to do is identify what is not allowed in terms of ethics and illegal activities, whether it is AI or not,” Republican Senator Mike Rounds, who heads the Senate AI Caucus, told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. This means holding artificial intelligence to the same ethics and privacy standards as other competencies.
Gary Peters, a Democrat from Michigan, recently hosted a gathering at which attendees debated the “pros and cons” of artificial intelligence (AI). Due to the fact that he chairs the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, he was able to exert his authority over the assemblage.
Peters has indicated that it is his intention to get a group together to talk about artificial intelligence and the appropriate social reaction to it.
Last week, Senator Michael Bennet, a Democrat from Colorado, sent a letter to the CEOs of various technology companies. In it, he pleaded with them to take into account the safety of children before making any new applications or AI systems available to the general public. Bennet also brought up the possibility of establishing an agency “in the long term” in order to oversee the business of artificial intelligence, which is presently unregulated.
When asked whether or not Congress should take action to regulate artificial intelligence, he responded, “I think we do have a role to play.” When asked about privacy, he suggested the establishment of an agency that would “negotiate on behalf of the American people.” He added, “In the long run, I think what we could do is set up, you know, an agency here.”
Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican from Colorado, is the champion of anti-Big Tech initiatives in the House of Representatives, and he has also encouraged Congress to act.
Buck told Fox News Digital, “The rise of AI brings both opportunities and challenges. We’ve seen the effects and consequences of a decade of inaction on Big Tech. Congress can’t afford to fall asleep at the wheel again.” Buck believes AI has great potential, but without regulation, it could be used to spread propaganda, alter our economy in dangerous ways, and grow the size of Big Tech monopolies. Buck thinks AI has great potential, but without regulation, it could be used to grow the size of Big Tech monopolies.
On the other hand, Senator JD Vance, a Republican from Ohio, thinks that it is too early for Congress to get involved in the field of artificial intelligence.
Vance stated, “I do not know enough about the situation to advocate for a specific course of action in Congress. I think we need to understand this a little bit better right now.” Vance’s statement was made in reference to the situation.