Share.

    7 Kommentare

    1. Quick TLDR pulled from the source:

      * AI can transform science, economy, and human knowledge but comes with risks such as workforce disruption and national security.
      * Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group aims for a balanced AI policy, highlighting both opportunities and societal impacts.
      * Forums on AI innovation, workforce, national security, and privacy suggest robust investment and stakeholder engagement.
      * Calls for minimum $32 billion/year in non-defense AI innovation funding to keep the US at the forefront of AI technology.
      * Mixed views on potential AI risks, from workplace changes to existential threats, with a focus on both immediate and long-term impacts.
      * The AI Working Group “supports a strong, comprehensive federal data privacy law to protect personal information.”

    2. Playful-Tumbleweed10 on

      This is essential, to keep the Chinese and Russian robots from defeating ours. Can’t spend enough on ai and all its applications. It’s the new arms race.

    3. The US also needs to increase the fertility rate, triple its population for the long game.

    4. disintegration7 on

      $32b/year for the gov’t to play with chatbots while we ignore actual problems. Fun.

    5. I find this reasoning for the spending dubious:

      > If China is „going to invest $50 billion, and we’re going to invest in nothing, they’ll inevitably get ahead of us. So that’s why even these investments are so important,“ Schumer said Wednesday.

      The private sector in the USA is investing heavily in AI. Why does the government need to subsidize an already well funded industry? Why are my tax dollars paying wealthy people to become more wealthy?

      I like other aspects of the legislation though. They’re creating oversight of AI and instructing government departments to adopt AI.

    6. SkelletorUTC on

      Or we could just stop funding the Chinese economy.
      It will be better for the world safety if we stop filling their war chest.

    Leave A Reply