A group of state attorneys general has voiced concerns over an executive order signed by President Biden last year, warning that it could lead to an increased level of government control over artificial intelligence (AI) and potentially be exploited for political purposes. The coalition of attorneys general, led by Utah AG Sean Reyes, argued that the executive order seeks to centralize control over AI technology being developed by the private sector. They also expressed worry that this control could be used to censor alleged “disinformation.”
President Biden signed the executive order in October, aiming to establish new standards for AI safety while safeguarding privacy, workers’ rights, and consumer protection. Developers were required to share safety test results and other pertinent information with the government. The order also intended to protect Americans from AI-enabled fraud by setting standards to differentiate between AI-generated and authentic content.
However, the attorneys general contend that the executive order grants the Commerce Department a “gatekeeping function” for overseeing AI development. They argue that the order imposes an “opaque and undemocratic process” on developers and could stifle AI innovation, reinforce the dominance of major tech companies, and fail to adequately protect citizens.
The attorneys general further assert that the executive order does not disclose how the federal government will utilize the information provided, creating what they describe as a “governmental black box.” They criticize the reporting requirements, suggesting that they are a pretext for the federal government to identify AI developers and pressure them into aligning with the administration’s preferences.
Moreover, the state attorneys general express concern that the executive order introduces partisan decision-making by requiring designers to demonstrate their ability to combat “disinformation.” They emphasize that the Defense Production Act, under which the order was issued, lacks the authority to regulate AI development, but only encourages its production.
In their letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, the attorneys general urge that issues related to AI should be addressed through the constitutional democratic process instead of executive fiat. They emphasize the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that any AI regulation is in line with authorized executive action and protects against government censorship.
While the Biden administration must navigate the complex task of regulating AI, it must do so with congressional involvement and respect for constitutional principles. The concerns raised by the attorneys general highlight the need for a balanced approach that avoids excessive government control, fosters innovation, and upholds democratic principles in shaping the future of AI.
FAQ:
1. What are state attorneys general concerned about regarding President Biden’s executive order on artificial intelligence?
State attorneys general are concerned that the executive order could lead to increased government control over AI and potential political exploitation.
2. What does the executive order aim to establish?
The executive order aims to establish new standards for AI safety while safeguarding privacy, workers’ rights, and consumer protection.
3. What requirements did the executive order set for developers?
Developers were required to share safety test results and other pertinent information with the government.
4. What concerns do the attorneys general have about the executive order’s impact on AI innovation?
The attorneys general argue that the executive order could stifle AI innovation, reinforce the dominance of major tech companies, and fail to adequately protect citizens.
5. What is the attorneys general’s concern about the disclosure of information provided under the executive order?
The attorneys general contend that the executive order does not disclose how the federal government will utilize the information, creating what they describe as a “governmental black box.”
6. How do the attorneys general view the reporting requirements of the executive order?
The attorneys general criticize the reporting requirements, suggesting that they are a pretext for the federal government to identify AI developers and pressure them into aligning with the administration’s preferences.
7. What do the attorneys general emphasize in their letter to the Commerce Secretary?
The attorneys general emphasize the importance of addressing AI issues through the constitutional democratic process and upholding the rule of law to prevent government censorship.
Definitions:
– Artificial Intelligence (AI): The simulation of human intelligence in machines that are programmed to think and learn like humans, perform tasks that typically require human intelligence, and improve their performance over time.
– Executive Order: A directive issued by the President of the United States that manages operations of the federal government. It carries the force of law and does not require congressional approval.
– Disinformation: False or misleading information that is spread deliberately to deceive or manipulate people’s perception of reality.
– Gatekeeping function: The act of controlling access to something, in this case, referring to the control over AI technology by the Commerce Department.
– Opaque and undemocratic process: A process that lacks transparency and democratic decision-making, where decisions are made without clear visibility or public involvement.
Suggested related link:
whitehouse.gov/ai (The official White House page on AI)