07-18-2024, 12:33 PM
This post was last modified 07-18-2024, 12:35 PM by Maxmars.
Edit Reason: added content
From ArsTechnica: Trump allies want to “Make America First in AI” with sweeping executive order
Subtitled: After repealing Biden's AI order, draft would create "Manhattan Projects" for military AI.
This article was reportedly a re-treatment of the following source:
From Washington Post: Trump allies draft AI order to launch ‘Manhattan Projects’ for defense
Subtitled: The plan to “Make America First in AI” and roll back “burdensome regulations” would favor Silicon Valley investors, who are now flocking to support the former president.
These articles describes a notional tug of war between the policies and intentions of the US government and Big Tech's treatment of the "AI" developments.
I would like to expand on some of the content here... only because I so vehemently disagree with the PR and marketing efforts, and the reality of so-called "AI."
The first point I would like to make is that, despite the media treatment, this is about who gets to control the AI market, who will be positioned to control the research, compartmentalize it's progress, and ultimately move closer to a defacto monopoly (the brass ring in big business.) This is not about AI "safety" nor is it really about global "competition."
The "AI" fantasy has been bought hook line and sinker by the occupants of our national administration. They instituted some measures of safeguarding in their own "executive order" prop; focusing on standardization of testing, "open" reporting of "safety" efforts, and firmly entrenching oversight and control in (of course) a body of politically-appointed offices and constructs. It was maddeningly vague and somewhat 'virtue signaling' fodder.
The "AI" industry has been ever-obsessed with eliminating any aspect of "Open Source" tendencies in AI, looking to ensure that fear and loathing are associated with the AI topic and all euphemisms which can be applied to the field. They want to be "the industry leaders" who "decide" the framework of the dialog... (my personal theory is that they want to control the industry for now and ever... sort of how the bank monopolizes monetary policy.)
But the political stage-directors are now folding the "AI" trope into the political discourse. The big focus is on "industry leaders" not having restraints or reporting obligations (call them 'responsibilities') which constrain their freedom to dictate exactly how AI gets deployed commercially.
And the media reporting seems to tell a tale of the support of Big Tech industry money movers - 'for sale'... as in if Trump removes the shackles of restraint from their plans they will offer him their financial support (read 'money' - meaning 'free speech.')
The fact that the Heritage Foundation and her members and leadership are featuring the topic within their "Project 2025" manifesto clearly shows where their predilections are. Further, the fact that the "Project 2025" document is NOT the same as the 2024 Republican Party Platform is currently being obfuscated by media reporting for the purposes of the political game... not reality.
Ultimately the AI question is not a central topic in the competition for the White House and executive leadership of the US. But as far as Big Tech is concerned... it would appear it is the ONLY topic.
Now the supposition that the authors of the 2025 Project call for sweeping Executive Order sidestepping of the previous administrations' cautionary approach seems to be a "point" which the AI industry leaders want highlighted - no, rather... "spotlighted."
I thought I would share this, just in case it proves a useful starting point for future considerations of the 'cost of support' and how disingenuously it can be portrayed.
For the record: AI does not now exist. It hasn't existed. It is not yet a reality. Unless it can be actually demonstrated otherwise, it is a boogey man, a specter... and we are far away from a self-aware self-motivated independently-intelligent mechanism... and that's not what the "industry" is trying to create... they are trying to create a slave mind.
Subtitled: After repealing Biden's AI order, draft would create "Manhattan Projects" for military AI.
This article was reportedly a re-treatment of the following source:
From Washington Post: Trump allies draft AI order to launch ‘Manhattan Projects’ for defense
Subtitled: The plan to “Make America First in AI” and roll back “burdensome regulations” would favor Silicon Valley investors, who are now flocking to support the former president.
These articles describes a notional tug of war between the policies and intentions of the US government and Big Tech's treatment of the "AI" developments.
I would like to expand on some of the content here... only because I so vehemently disagree with the PR and marketing efforts, and the reality of so-called "AI."
The first point I would like to make is that, despite the media treatment, this is about who gets to control the AI market, who will be positioned to control the research, compartmentalize it's progress, and ultimately move closer to a defacto monopoly (the brass ring in big business.) This is not about AI "safety" nor is it really about global "competition."
The "AI" fantasy has been bought hook line and sinker by the occupants of our national administration. They instituted some measures of safeguarding in their own "executive order" prop; focusing on standardization of testing, "open" reporting of "safety" efforts, and firmly entrenching oversight and control in (of course) a body of politically-appointed offices and constructs. It was maddeningly vague and somewhat 'virtue signaling' fodder.
The "AI" industry has been ever-obsessed with eliminating any aspect of "Open Source" tendencies in AI, looking to ensure that fear and loathing are associated with the AI topic and all euphemisms which can be applied to the field. They want to be "the industry leaders" who "decide" the framework of the dialog... (my personal theory is that they want to control the industry for now and ever... sort of how the bank monopolizes monetary policy.)
But the political stage-directors are now folding the "AI" trope into the political discourse. The big focus is on "industry leaders" not having restraints or reporting obligations (call them 'responsibilities') which constrain their freedom to dictate exactly how AI gets deployed commercially.
And the media reporting seems to tell a tale of the support of Big Tech industry money movers - 'for sale'... as in if Trump removes the shackles of restraint from their plans they will offer him their financial support (read 'money' - meaning 'free speech.')
The fact that the Heritage Foundation and her members and leadership are featuring the topic within their "Project 2025" manifesto clearly shows where their predilections are. Further, the fact that the "Project 2025" document is NOT the same as the 2024 Republican Party Platform is currently being obfuscated by media reporting for the purposes of the political game... not reality.
Ultimately the AI question is not a central topic in the competition for the White House and executive leadership of the US. But as far as Big Tech is concerned... it would appear it is the ONLY topic.
Now the supposition that the authors of the 2025 Project call for sweeping Executive Order sidestepping of the previous administrations' cautionary approach seems to be a "point" which the AI industry leaders want highlighted - no, rather... "spotlighted."
I thought I would share this, just in case it proves a useful starting point for future considerations of the 'cost of support' and how disingenuously it can be portrayed.
For the record: AI does not now exist. It hasn't existed. It is not yet a reality. Unless it can be actually demonstrated otherwise, it is a boogey man, a specter... and we are far away from a self-aware self-motivated independently-intelligent mechanism... and that's not what the "industry" is trying to create... they are trying to create a slave mind.
