a body has been formed to regulate ai development

  • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    • Lord_Fluffington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      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.

  • TerminusEst@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    • Godort@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s like the ESRB for video games.

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

    • cashsky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • j4k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      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.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      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
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

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

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    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.