Joe Biden’s White House Comes With AI Plans

In a short time the prophets of doom pile up. It is certain that artificial intelligence, or AI, will change our lives. Automation has been killing jobs for centuries. Usually a lot comes back in the lee. Where two hundred years ago a lot of wooden or non-wooden footwear was pressed between mechanisms, the current dissatisfaction expresses itself differently. It is also special that people who have been at the cradle of AI are sounding the alarm.

Worry about the fast pace

No social upheaval is bloodless. AI is going to cost people their jobs anyway. With this sword of Damocles above its head, the writers’ guild of America has already taken the initiative. They want assurance from employers that AI will be kept out. These kinds of reactions are also part of it. It is a natural process in which hopefully everyone will come out better in the future. It is important that developments keep pace that employers and employees can keep up with. Let’s just get so worked up about that. According to many, AI is currently going way too fast.

Add to that all the usual doomsday scenarios and there is indeed reason for regulation. After all, you better anticipate the moment when AI starts to pose a real threat to humanity. Since Chat GPT derivative Chaos GPT, when asked to come up with a plan to wipe out humanity, Googled how to get a nuclear bomb, I think we still have a while.

Guidelines for US government agencies

Still, when you have to wait for the government, you can never start early enough. And so it is good news that the US government has announced that it will come up with policy. Specifically, they want to record how government agencies should and may deal with AI. Since the US government is quite a market in itself, this kind of regulation has the potential to influence the entire AI field.

Meanwhile, Vice President Kamala Harris has asked the CEOs of Google, Microsoft, Open AI (known for ChatGPT) and Anthropic (developer of AI systems) during a meeting at the White House to explicitly consider the consequences of their creations for society . According to Harris, the legal, ethical and moral responsibility lies entirely with the companies that develop AI systems.

“Tech companies have a fundamental responsibility to ensure the safety of their products and human rights before these products reach the market.” A Biden administration official told the press prior to this discussion.

Possibly more legislation in the future

Biden and Harris emphasize that AI holds great promise. The potential to improve lives is there, however, according to the Biden administration, it is very important that the risks associated with these developments are taken seriously. So that steps are taken to limit these risks. The fact that the existing laws will also be applied to tackle the excesses of AI was once again underlined for the record.

But the ball is not entirely in the business world’s court. In addition to the above policies, Harris issued another statement:
“Government, private companies and others in society must meet this challenge together. President Biden and I are committed to doing our part, including potentially introducing new legislation and supporting existing legislation. This so that everyone remains safe and can benefit from technological developments.”

Governments are not alone in the US regulating this new development. In the United Kingdom, but also in the European Union, legislators are working on it.

Uncertain future

The strike in Hollywood does indicate that the concerns are great. So a good number of knowledgeable people share these concerns. Fortunately, reactions from governments are gradually getting underway, although the future will show whether it is sufficient. Since last March’s petition has fallen on deaf ears among the CEOs of the big tech companies, Harris’ call will be insufficient. The CEOs are clearly more concerned about the opinion of their shareholders. Something tells me that at the next election in the Netherlands the voters will have a number of questions about the so-called ‘artificial intelligence’.