this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
126 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

59329 readers
4667 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

a body has been formed to regulate ai development

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com 72 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A body of corporations to regulate anything is not a body of regulation; it's a body of extraction constrained by managing public expectations.

[–] SpunkyBarnes@geddit.social 4 points 1 year ago

With the support of government, don’t forget. Legislators have portfolios, needing constant attention.

[–] Lord_Fluffington@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Hit the nail on the head. I mean most governments regulation has been bought and paid for by corps for a long time anyway. I guess I better get my Rick Deckard coat and bottle of whiskey and my off world papers ready cause bladerunner here we come.

A regulatory board backed by corporations isn't the headline I wanted to read...

[–] TerminusEst@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An oversight board comprised of the very people who are most likely to abuse AI? What could possibly go wrong?!

[–] Godort@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

It's like the ESRB for video games.

Created explicitly to prevent the government from stepping in and regulating things properly

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because self-regulation worked so good in the past and this is totally not a move to make it hard for others to work in the field negate that advantage they made so far.

[–] cashsky@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

They will just fire anyone on the "regulatory" body that interferes with their $$$.

[–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They're only desperate to preserve their first-mover advantage by making it harder for the competition to bring AI products to the market.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's definitely part of it, but I suspect they realise what has come out of Pandora's box cannot be put back in. I guess you can't really appreciate how someone can misuse or abuse something until you see it first hand, there will always be things people do which defy your imagination.

[–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don't think they care about opening "Pandora's box" as Microsoft in particular had no issues collaborating with the Chinese military on AI research.

[–] Raisin8659@monyet.cc 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A body has been formed to stifle competition and give themselves free reins.

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

The basis of theft. Proprietary software is always about exploiting the end user through theft of ownership. Open Source has already beat these asshats at AI. No one wants to run their stalkerware in a world where any open and offline option exists. This is extremely obvious.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Admittedly they have said before that they're not particularly interested in trying to regulate open source projects. So it's not so bad.

[–] simple@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Seems a bit awkward to have the people regulating AI development be the same ones leading it, but we'll see how it goes.

[–] socalledrates@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

maybe its a body to gatekeep ai development instead of regulating it, who knows

[–] Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

That's what we have to assume.

[–] z3n0x@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

That's how it works in finance as well. "Self-regulation" - no conflict of interest here ...

[–] boeman@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Shit, now the AI has a body!

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

And if some company or individual decides to ignore this "regulatory body" that these companies have just decided should be in charge of everything, what happens? Did any governments agree to this? Why do those particular companies get to decide who should be able to compete with them? Kind of convenient that the companies with the biggest lead in AI have declared that they get to decide what's "safe" for other companies to do while trying to catch up with them.

[–] SpunkyBarnes@geddit.social 4 points 1 year ago

Ooo…a brand new Triumvirate of Terror, one that could go worldwide. All hail our new AI Overlords! /s

[–] tinkeringidiot@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

And why exactly should I or anyone else confine our research to what these monopolies want?

[–] jtk@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago