Two, China's major motivation for developing competitive AI isn't to reap the benefits from an an important new technology. It's to undermine the economic development of the West and make them even more dependent upon the CCP. It's an extension of the policy that's made us dependent on Chinese labor and manufacturing: win on the economics by any means necessary, wait for the other producers to die, enshittify (extract geopolitical concessions, in this case).
A number of non adequately reliable actors owning "the bomb" and a number of threatened actors increasingly wanting "the bomb". Not really.
Development of nuclear weapons has continued, and a lot of effort goes into developing delivery systems.
A number of countries have acquired nuclear weapons over the years: India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa, North Korea. More countries have kept their options open and could develop nuclear weapons if needed.
I'm assuming your bar of success takes in account that 8-9 nation states have nukes. So it follows that 8-9 nation states should have ASI.
> the obvious international treaty
That's even easier. We just take the international treaty on cloud computing as a base and...
Pausing development means the people with the currently most advanced models are shielded from competition, especially if foreign competition is not allowed.
A new agency will impose heavy regulation which can easily be twisted to favour incumbents.
Question: how aware are they?
Given the missed "intellectual solidity" of the submitted proposal, there is a chance that their effective support to the other party is not conscious.
And in terms of civilization, the confrontation is downgraded to ventral partitism, hysterical: "not like it" vs "really want it or do not mind".
Speaking of which, doesn’t this bill die after midterms anyway?
So this is just the bonus round where every inane idea gets introduced for the headline before being reset
Obviously it's not the intent of the bill to jail calculator makers. So the bill should be written to make it clear exactly what it's criminalizing.
The bill isn't about using LLMs to merge your pull requests, it's about discouraging people or companies who might be working on their own private Manhattan Projects from intentionally trying to create the impact equivalent of nuclear weapons, or "Artificial Superintelligence".
We're getting closer than not to an A(S)I arms race. Sanders has lived his entire life in that, and I've been smelling it for a while, too.
(Btw, "up to" doesn't mean "to". Second comprehension mistake in a few lines- I bet all current generation of LLMs have better understanding.)
Which is exactly the same as the submission's post, obvious interpretations of "AI" aside: how can we implement Intelligence without enabling superintelligence at the same time?!
And of course we must implement Intelligence, finally: we have implemented further morons, of which we already had plentiful abundance - already the LLM stage must be corrected!
Let's just slap 20 years on the scifi grifters too, please.
That would be?
You stated that the submission did not represent the facts because the facts are about banning «research on ASI», and you were replied that what we are doing in the LLM direction cannot be other than researching ASI. And you were told: and we must, because we cannot be contented with morons.
There are international agreements on tons of things that work the same way.
Which would be either very difficult or very ironical, given that realizing that humanity is a threat to humanity precedes that.
A ban on technology results in underground research, migration of intellectuals, monopolies, seething parties...
Or you think that «Advanced AI development» does not imply attempting the achievement of Intelligence?