Joe Biden Wants US Government Algorithms Tested for Potential Harm Against Citizens
wired.com
Highlights: The White House issued draft rules today that would require federal agencies to evaluate and constantly monitor algorithms used in health care, law enforcement, and housing for potential discrimination or other harmful effects on human rights.
Once in effect, the rules could force changes in US government activity dependent on AI, such as the FBI’s use of face recognition technology, which has been criticized for not taking steps called for by Congress to protect civil liberties. The new rules would require government agencies to assess existing algorithms by August 2024 and stop using any that don’t comply.
I mean that broadly seems like a good thing. Execution is important, but on paper this seems like the kind of forward thinking policy we need
Quite frankly it didn't put enough restrictions on the various "national security" agencies, and so while it may help to stem the tide of irresponsible usage by many of the lesser-impact agencies, it doesn't do the same for the agencies that we know will be the worst offenders (and have been the worst offenders).
I really don't understand the downvotes on this comment...
NSA bots downvoting.
Now they’ll stop so they don’t let on, but then they’ll start again to throw you off
“If the benefits do not meaningfully outweigh the risks, agencies should not use the AI,” the memo says. But the draft memo carves out an exemption for models that deal with national security and allows agencies to effectively issue themselves waivers if ending use of an AI model “would create an unacceptable impediment to critical agency operations.”
This tells me that nothing is going to change if people can just say their algoriths would make them too inefficient. Great sentiment but this loophole will make it useless.
This seems to me like an exception that would realistically only apply to the CIA, NSA, and sometimes the FBI. I doubt the Department of Housing and Urban Development will get a pass. Overall seems like a good change in a good direction.
The CIA and NSA are exactly who we don't want using it though.
Agreed but it’s at least a step forward, setting a precedent for AI in government use. I would love a perfect world where all bills passed are “all or nothing” legislation but realistically this is a good start, and then citizens should demand tighter oversight on national security agencies as the next issue to tackle
"next issue to tackle"
It's been the next issue to tackle since at least October 26th, 2001. They have no accountability. Adding these carve outs is just making it harder to get accountability.
They're exactly who will carry on using it, even if there weren't any exemptions.
Well that and customs/border patrol
Like either of those agencies will let us know what they are doing in the first place.
At a certain level, there are no rules when they never have to tell what they are doing.
given the "success" of Israel's hi tech border fence it seems like bureacracies think tech will work better than actually, you know, resolving/preventing geopolitical problems with diplomacy and intelligence.
I worry these kind of tech solutions become a predictable crutch. Assuming there is some kind of real necessity to these spy programs (debatable) it seems like reliance on data tech can become a weakness as soon as those intending harm understand how it works
I'd rather them not either, but don't underestimate the harm bad management of other organizations can and has done.
I'm actually less worried about them.
Local police departments on the other hand, can arrest and get you sent to jail based on flimsy facial recognition, and it doesn't even make the local news.
Well they already are lol. It makes their jobs much easier so I wouldn’t be surprised if they have better library’s than the public services.
the fact that the CIA and NSA will have the AI is the most effective argument for why we should have the AI.
It’s the basic idea of the second amendment all over again:
The exact same applies in this situation with AI:
Algorithms that gerrymander voting district boundries might be an early battleground.
The early battleground of 2010 when they started using RedMap.
"Realistically" baahahaba. Right.
Folksy narrator: "Turns out, the U.S. government can not operate without racism."
It's not a "great sentiment" - it's essentially just more of the same liberal "let's pretend we care by doing something completely ineffective" posturing and little else.
Democrats are so fucking naive. They actually think that a system of permission slips is sufficient to protect us from the singularity.
OpenAI’s original mission, before they forgot it, was the only workable method: distribute the AI far and wide to establish a multipolar ecosystem.
Hell fucking yea. Who is this Biden guy?
Dark Brandon is Awake.
I wish he was around more often than Sleepy Joe. 😔
Sleepy Joe is just a manufactured slur by a demented idiot supported only by second-long video clips of Biden between going to meetings and making changes.
I swear to god there has to be an entire chapter in Gödel Escher Bach about how this is literally impossible.
Wow it's been years since I read GEB..
I should revisit it. Thanks!
You’re never going to be able to formally prove anything as nebulous as “harm” full stop, so this isn’t a very convincing argument imo.
Achilles: /facepalm
Is it already too late for us? Does anyone truly believe that will be enough to protect us?
Sent to my state representative. Thanks!
Watchmen watching over themselves, what could possibly go wrong right?
This isn't a comic book. Its good policy.
Interesting. I want algorithms to warn us about potential harms by Joe Biden. What if we were able to fund an AI run by the GAO that can tell us when government decisions make the majority of our lives worse?
It's a long way off and might be a bad idea to trust an AI outright, but I just wish we had a more data informed government.
You might be interested in data.gov. The Obama admin kicked of the Government Open Data Initiative to provide transparency in government. Agencies have been given a means to publish their data, which US taxes pay for. You'd be surprised what's in there. It's not an algorithm, but you could certainly build one from that if you wanted to.
As long as he doesn't start getting in the way of open source algorithms were fine.
Delay llama 3 and I'm voting for whoever runs against Biden. No exceptions, I will become a single issue voter and this will be my issue.
Pretty dumb dawg. The people running against him want christofascism. Not becoming the Christian version of Iran is my single issue.
Nope, this is the most important issue for me. It overrides all other concerns.
Why is it the most important issue for you?
The thing that has the most direct and pressing impact on my life right now. A ban on open source AI would be like a ban on watching television.
I must guess you cannot get pregnant, aren't a minority, as well as are wealthy. Otherwise I cannot see how this can ever be true.
That second one doesn't matter when it comes to abortion because guys also have wives and girlfriends who can get pregnant and it's pretty important they can abort when they do. Acting like abortion isn't something that impacts men as well is nothing just isn't the truth.
And I'm not really wealthy, but I live a pretty slimmed down lifestyle with very few expenses such the money is not a direct concern.
When there are no pressing issues for me to vote for those things become stuff I would vote along the lines of, and I side with a Democrats on all of them.
But I'm not some idiot who's going to vote for the sake of other people, I vote for issues that matter to me and nothing else.
Don't fuck with AI (and continue funding Ukraine) and I'll be on their side. Simple as that.
That's quite a long winded way of saying, "fuck you, I got mine."
Well no, I don't got mine, quite the opposite. "Mine" is literally in the process of being banned.
I'm saying "fuck you, if you act against my interests I'm not voting for you"
And I'll stand by that to the end. When "mine" is no longer under threat I'll vote for Democrats every day of the week.
Your health, life, and freedom isn't under attack like those groups listed. All you care about is if you get a fancy new toy, and to hell with everyone else's rights.
AI isn't just a toy. It's a potentially world changing technology and the government wants to ensure the common person doesn't have any control over how it's used.
Denying access to the common person will be the largest act of theft of power from the people to big companies this century.
And like I said. I'm not an idiot who votes for other people. I vote for my interests. Banning AI makes that my interest. Without such a threat, I'll vote for other common goods, because those benefit me as well.
Like I said, epitome of, "fuck you, I got mine." You don't care about the rights of other's because yours aren't under threat.
Why not vote for the sake of other people when their lives, health, and safety are on the line?
Because I've seen these things work and I know for damn sure that if those people have a chance to vote for me they wouldn't do it in a million years.
I've learned better than the trust narratives of how you should be a good person.
All I will get is yet more rounds of talk about how everyone else needs help while all the issues I actually care about are left to wither and die.
So fuck them, I'm voting based on the issues that I feel are important and impact my life.
People are dying because of conservative policies but you think AI is more important than that. That’s sad. I would vote for you if your rights were being denied.
I sure hope you are a strawman account because you are an idiot if this is who you are.
The idiot is the person who votes based on other people's priorities.
If you want to believe garbage about some impending Christian fascist state you're more than welcome to, but reality is quite a bit more mundane.
If we end up in a fucking concentration camp together I am shiving you. You stupid motherfucker.
You can shiv me in your doomerist fantasies.
Aint doomer, just a very big follower of hope for the best prepare for the worst. Has kept my kin and ancestor alive in the past will do the same in the future. But then again I aint the retard who's more worried about useless tech junk that'll probably have minimum effect on society as whole.
I probably wont convince ya of jack and or shit, but what I can do is point out that not looking out for other folks usually ends badly for people. A shunned man is a deadman.
Acting like everyone ending up in concentration camps is without question doomerist.
So does letting the government put the most revolutionary technology of the century in the hands of big tech. The Democrats choose their policy. If nobody swing votes and you all expect the world to blindly vote Democrat they'll get away with shit they shouldn't get away with.
The ideal scenario is that there are enough people like me that the Democrats think twice about being overbearing and still win regardless.
Concentration camp is just one of many possible scenarios. Regardless LLMs aint the most revolutionary tech of the century, its just one of many tools currently being devoloped, Its just hyped to shit cause its fancy and most folks dont care to understand how it functions.
You really do come across as one of those gormless tech bro wannabes who latch onto every flashy bit of tech you come across. Like solar roadways, or the hyperloop, or the thorium powered car.
It aint revolutionary dumbass, its cleverbot with a fancy coat of paint, new buzzwords, and some impressive but inconsequential improvements. And thats just the chatbots, the "art" bots a pretty much the same though using key words and association to create a rather impressive collage.
Frankly if ya want revolutionary tech go look at some of the new nuclear reactors being researched, or new biofuel refinement methods, or fuck even organ cloning. None of them are glamorous but progress rarely is.
Oh it is though. Not LLMs, they'll probably go out of date soon. AI is the thing that's revolutionary. Only second to genetic modification, but AI and most other forms of human advancement will likely be hand in hand.
This is irrelevant but I didn't buy the crap on any of those.
Or crypto.
AI is actually producing results. It's in use as we speak. It's producing real value. It's not some fantasy far off thing. You can use them today.
And you probably use AI every single day when you open your phone and take a picture. You'll eat these words, and when you do you'll hopefully have access to the tech yourself, because otherwise Mister Microsoft will control who can and can't succeed in the world.
Dude im using a beat up s7 so in lucky if the camera wants to work, im sure as shit aint getting ai on it and its updateless crap.
And secondly I really want nothing to do with "AI" (fucking hate that marketing labeled it that) and I kinda hope it all falls in on itself longterm.
Short of it working as generally software improvements or added tools its looking to be at best a new tool for corporations to exploit us with. Hyper targeted ads and all that. Frankly I severly doubt its gonna lead to much more than some slightly imporved automation for manufacturing. It will probably crash face first into a wall once computer tech starts hitting the power limitations for computation again.
Short of biotech allowing us to combine organic brains and computers I suspect we're already approaching the "AIs" limit.
Also can we stop calling it fucking "AI" at best its simulated intellegence theres a fucking difference ones sapient or maybe even sentient and the other is just a really smart calculator
I don't think you have anything to worry about. All this requires is that any models used by the government are tested for bias. Which is a good thing.
Go ask an early generation ai image generator to make pictures of people cleaning and it will give you a bunch of pictures of women. There are all sorts of examples of racial, sex, and religious biases in the models because of the data they were trained on.
Requiring the executive agencies to test for bias is a good thing.
This will entrench big tech in federal government, but I'm not too worried about limits on the government.
Yeah, the only concern I have so far is the leverage of the defense powers act to require foundational model development to sent red team results to the Fed. That's a hint that will enable them to ban release of models in the future.
Joe Biden probably has no idea what most of those words mean, let's be honest here. He's only the president because the only other option we were given was worse.
I don't want somebody that knows and understands everything. I want somebody that surround themselves with people that collectively know and understand, and can then explain it to him like he's an octogenarian.
Exactly. The best president is the one who consults with others on essentially everything. Even if they are an expert in an area, Still get second opinions. Obviously that is time permitting, They still need to be knowledgeable enough to react quickly when necessary.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Trump's policy to always be the smartest person in the room? That would explain some things...
So what? The biggest part of picking a President is the people they're going to put in their cabinet and surround themselves with. That's the problem with Trump. He's going to fill the presidency with a bunch of maga ass hats, on top of doing his own damage.
Just because some of us understand this issue better than him it doesn't mean that we should expect him to understand everything at the same level as if he worked in the area.. it's impossible he can't be an expert economist, computer scientist, anthropologist, chemist, biologist, etc... rolled into one.
For the record I don't think he is a great president.
You cannot judge how great a President was until long after they are out of office. Good things usually take time. Bad things can be immediate.
Yea. But he doesn’t seem to have a vision. I don’t think corruption is great and bidenomics is just bullshit. I am not saying he is the worst ever just that it’s not very good.
I’m not sure what you’re looking for with a “vision.” Sounds like something a populist does and fails at. Biden has to fix all the shit Trump and the Republicans ruined and he won’t likely have time for a lot else. If he can get control of Congress next year by a good margin it’ll help.
To give you an example he might claim to want to curb the corruption by changing and limiting donations to political candidates/organizations. The populist vapid version of this would be something vague but catchy like “drain the swamp” that can mean anything.
The President doesn’t have the power to do that.
Ok if you could not understand that was an example I think Im good with my current opinion.
I’d expect when talking about a specific person’s vision, you’d give an example of something that specific person can do.
Id expect that people that can’t differentiate between demagoguery and vision to stay on topic when given an example instead of responding that the president can’t do so.
What are you even talking about? You want him to make speeches telling you what you want to hear even if he has no power to do it?
At least you remain consistent with your responses. have a nice day.
Not if you ask the freaks in /r/neoliberal. They think he's the best president ever and that his only problem is a bad PR team lmao
He’s absolutely fine, and the vast majority of complaints I’ve seen fundamentally misunderstand the limits of the Presidency and why an experienced politician has rightful reasons to be cautious about the consequences of radical actions. Populists love to fill your head up with great ideas, but gloss over or ignore the consequences. Some end up lying about it others aren’t effective. Experienced politicians aren’t flashy but get things done step by step.
He's absolutely fine if you don't care about unconditional support for a genocidal apartheid state or the right to strike. Those are both cases where doing literally nothing would have been better than what he personally did.
Gaza–Israel is a hugely complicated situation. Let Hamas get away with it and you show their backers that they can get away with attacks like these. The Biden administration works behind the scenes more than out in public. We won’t know what they are saying to the Israelis. It’s a proxy war with no good solution. What are you referring to specifically?
You're wrong, but you're actually right.
I'm only "wrong" because others are reading something other than what I said. I'm gratified that at least one person understood though.
No, people are responding to what you said. Maybe what you wrote doesn't impart your meaning as well as you thought it does.
Cool story bro.