Highlights: The White House issued draft rules today that would require federal agencies to evaluate and constantly monitor algorithms used in health care, law enforcement, and housing for potential discrimination or other harmful effects on human rights.
Once in effect, the rules could force changes in US government activity dependent on AI, such as the FBI’s use of face recognition technology, which has been criticized for not taking steps called for by Congress to protect civil liberties. The new rules would require government agencies to assess existing algorithms by August 2024 and stop using any that don’t comply.
I mean that broadly seems like a good thing. Execution is important, but on paper this seems like the kind of forward thinking policy we need
Quite frankly it didn’t put enough restrictions on the various “national security” agencies, and so while it may help to stem the tide of irresponsible usage by many of the lesser-impact agencies, it doesn’t do the same for the agencies that we know will be the worst offenders (and have been the worst offenders).
“If the benefits do not meaningfully outweigh the risks, agencies should not use the AI,” the memo says. But the draft memo carves out an exemption for models that deal with national security and allows agencies to effectively issue themselves waivers if ending use of an AI model “would create an unacceptable impediment to critical agency operations.”
This tells me that nothing is going to change if people can just say their algoriths would make them too inefficient. Great sentiment but this loophole will make it useless.
This seems to me like an exception that would realistically only apply to the CIA, NSA, and sometimes the FBI. I doubt the Department of Housing and Urban Development will get a pass. Overall seems like a good change in a good direction.
Agreed but it’s at least a step forward, setting a precedent for AI in government use. I would love a perfect world where all bills passed are “all or nothing” legislation but realistically this is a good start, and then citizens should demand tighter oversight on national security agencies as the next issue to tackle
given the “success” of Israel’s hi tech border fence it seems like bureacracies think tech will work better than actually, you know, resolving/preventing geopolitical problems with diplomacy and intelligence.
I worry these kind of tech solutions become a predictable crutch. Assuming there is some kind of real necessity to these spy programs (debatable) it seems like reliance on data tech can become a weakness as soon as those intending harm understand how it works
the fact that the CIA and NSA will have the AI is the most effective argument for why we should have the AI.
It’s the basic idea of the second amendment all over again:
- It would be great if nobody had guns
- But the government isn’t going to stop having guns
- And only one side having guns is way worse than everyone having guns
- So everyone gets to have guns
The exact same applies in this situation with AI:
- It would be great if nobody had AI
- But the government isn’t going to stop having AI
- And only one side having AI is way worse than everyone having AI
- So everyone gets to have AI
Algorithms that gerrymander voting district boundries might be an early battleground.
Democrats are so fucking naive. They actually think that a system of permission slips is sufficient to protect us from the singularity.
OpenAI’s original mission, before they forgot it, was the only workable method: distribute the AI far and wide to establish a multipolar ecosystem.
Hell fucking yea. Who is this Biden guy?
A lot of my leftist friends will still let the bad be the enemy of any sort of good whatsoever it seems. It’s exhausting as a leftist when you can never be outraged enough for other leftists.
Dark Brandon is Awake.
I wish he was around more often than Sleepy Joe. 😔
I swear to god there has to be an entire chapter in Gödel Escher Bach about how this is literally impossible.
They know, the DNC wanted single payer initially and compromised and they’ve been the party with a single payer platform ever since.
If the DNC at any point had the house and 2/3rds of the Senate then we would have Single Payer Health Care right now. We don’t because they can’t.
