The Nonlinear Library: LessWrong LW - The Schumer Report on AI (RTFB) by Zvi
May 25, 2024
01:00:11
Link to original article
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The Schumer Report on AI (RTFB), published by Zvi on May 25, 2024 on LessWrong.
Or at least, Read the Report (RTFR).
There is no substitute. This is not strictly a bill, but it is important.
The introduction kicks off balancing upside and avoiding downside, utility and risk. This will be a common theme, with a very strong 'why not both?' vibe.
Early in the 118th Congress, we were brought together by a shared recognition of the profound changes artificial intelligence (AI) could bring to our world: AI's capacity to revolutionize the realms of science, medicine, agriculture, and beyond; the exceptional benefits that a flourishing AI ecosystem could offer our economy and our productivity; and AI's ability to radically alter human capacity and knowledge.
At the same time, we each recognized the potential risks AI could present, including altering our workforce in the short-term and long-term, raising questions about the application of existing laws in an AI-enabled world, changing the dynamics of our national security, and raising the threat of potential doomsday scenarios. This led to the formation of our Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group ("AI Working Group").
They did their work over nine forums.
1. Inaugural Forum
2. Supporting U.S. Innovation in AI
3. AI and the Workforce
4. High Impact Uses of AI
5. Elections and Democracy
6. Privacy and Liability
7. Transparency, Explainability, Intellectual Property, and Copyright
8. Safeguarding Against AI Risks
9. National Security
Existential risks were always given relatively minor time, with it being a topic for at most a subset of the final two forums. By contrast, mundane downsides and upsides were each given three full forums. This report was about response to AI across a broad spectrum.
The Big Spend
They lead with a proposal to spend 'at least' $32 billion a year on 'AI innovation.'
No, there is no plan on how to pay for that.
In this case I do not think one is needed. I would expect any reasonable implementation of that to pay for itself via economic growth. The downsides are tail risks and mundane harms, but I wouldn't worry about the budget. If anything, AI's arrival is a reason to be very not freaked out about the budget. Official projections are baking in almost no economic growth or productivity impacts.
They ask that this money be allocated via a method called emergency appropriations. This is part of our government's longstanding way of using the word 'emergency.'
We are going to have to get used to this when it comes to AI.
Events in AI are going to be happening well beyond the 'non-emergency' speed of our government and especially of Congress, both opportunities and risks.
We will have opportunities that appear and compound quickly, projects that need our support. We will have stupid laws and rules, both that were already stupid or are rendered stupid, that need to be fixed.
Risks and threats, not only catastrophic or existential risks but also mundane risks and enemy actions, will arise far faster than our process can pass laws, draft regulatory rules with extended comment periods and follow all of our procedures.
In this case? It is May. The fiscal year starts in October. I want to say, hold your damn horses. But also, you think Congress is passing a budget this year? We will be lucky to get a continuing resolution. Permanent emergency. Sigh.
What matters more is, what do they propose to do with all this money?
A lot of things. And it does not say how much money is going where. If I was going to ask for a long list of things that adds up to $32 billion, I would say which things were costing how much money. But hey. Instead, it looks like he took the number from NSCAI, and then created a laundry list of things he wanted, without bothering to create a budget of any kind?
It also seems like they took the origin...
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The Schumer Report on AI (RTFB), published by Zvi on May 25, 2024 on LessWrong.
Or at least, Read the Report (RTFR).
There is no substitute. This is not strictly a bill, but it is important.
The introduction kicks off balancing upside and avoiding downside, utility and risk. This will be a common theme, with a very strong 'why not both?' vibe.
Early in the 118th Congress, we were brought together by a shared recognition of the profound changes artificial intelligence (AI) could bring to our world: AI's capacity to revolutionize the realms of science, medicine, agriculture, and beyond; the exceptional benefits that a flourishing AI ecosystem could offer our economy and our productivity; and AI's ability to radically alter human capacity and knowledge.
At the same time, we each recognized the potential risks AI could present, including altering our workforce in the short-term and long-term, raising questions about the application of existing laws in an AI-enabled world, changing the dynamics of our national security, and raising the threat of potential doomsday scenarios. This led to the formation of our Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group ("AI Working Group").
They did their work over nine forums.
1. Inaugural Forum
2. Supporting U.S. Innovation in AI
3. AI and the Workforce
4. High Impact Uses of AI
5. Elections and Democracy
6. Privacy and Liability
7. Transparency, Explainability, Intellectual Property, and Copyright
8. Safeguarding Against AI Risks
9. National Security
Existential risks were always given relatively minor time, with it being a topic for at most a subset of the final two forums. By contrast, mundane downsides and upsides were each given three full forums. This report was about response to AI across a broad spectrum.
The Big Spend
They lead with a proposal to spend 'at least' $32 billion a year on 'AI innovation.'
No, there is no plan on how to pay for that.
In this case I do not think one is needed. I would expect any reasonable implementation of that to pay for itself via economic growth. The downsides are tail risks and mundane harms, but I wouldn't worry about the budget. If anything, AI's arrival is a reason to be very not freaked out about the budget. Official projections are baking in almost no economic growth or productivity impacts.
They ask that this money be allocated via a method called emergency appropriations. This is part of our government's longstanding way of using the word 'emergency.'
We are going to have to get used to this when it comes to AI.
Events in AI are going to be happening well beyond the 'non-emergency' speed of our government and especially of Congress, both opportunities and risks.
We will have opportunities that appear and compound quickly, projects that need our support. We will have stupid laws and rules, both that were already stupid or are rendered stupid, that need to be fixed.
Risks and threats, not only catastrophic or existential risks but also mundane risks and enemy actions, will arise far faster than our process can pass laws, draft regulatory rules with extended comment periods and follow all of our procedures.
In this case? It is May. The fiscal year starts in October. I want to say, hold your damn horses. But also, you think Congress is passing a budget this year? We will be lucky to get a continuing resolution. Permanent emergency. Sigh.
What matters more is, what do they propose to do with all this money?
A lot of things. And it does not say how much money is going where. If I was going to ask for a long list of things that adds up to $32 billion, I would say which things were costing how much money. But hey. Instead, it looks like he took the number from NSCAI, and then created a laundry list of things he wanted, without bothering to create a budget of any kind?
It also seems like they took the origin...