This is kinda scary to think about... If we at some point have to pay a 'token-tax' or 'AI-tax' just to have access to something that may be embedded in all aspects of life... I fear society will get even more divided.
The thinking in this article seems muddled to me. Historically there are two fundamental models for rivalries between powerful economic actors and national governments.
* Regulatory capture - AI Labs [partially] capture government functions, i.e., take over. In practice this equates to oligarchy.
* Nationalization - Government takes over AI labs through some form of direct or indirect control (e.g., dirigisme).
The article discussion does not seem to consider either of them. And the idea that AI labs would act in the interest of citizens at large seems laughable. In practice it looks like California Forever [0], which is quite the opposite.
This is the guy who said open weight models are “decelerationist” and will lead to “AI communism” and a “dystopian hellscape” so I’d categorize him more as an OpenAI spokesperson than a strategist. His takes always sound more like someone who chugged the kool aid rather than any kind of rational take.
As Moises Naim says, these days power is easy to get, hard to use, easy to loose.
As complexity/unpredictability rises in any system its natual that govt will shed power. We have already seen this with setting of interest rates.
There is a long list of reasons why the Treasury Dept, President, House, Senate, Supreme Court or NASA doesnt get to set the rate.
Why did they hand over that power to the central bank? Read some financial system evolution history. Mindlessly ambitious people, the kind who run things hardly ever hand over power to someone else unless they see weilding the power puts a giant bulls eye on their head when the inevitable unpredictable/uncontrolable event occurs. Same goes with the Church or Religious institutions. Why does govt stay out of that lane? Why did Italy hand over the Vatican to the Church?
at least in a democracy, even if flawed, power comes from the people, that is the fundamental raison d'être for people allowing a government to exist
this isn't the case of "AI Labs"
what he is proposing is nothing less then establishing at least partial oligarchy, or in other words while indirectly he is relatively openly saying he wants to overthrow not just the US constitution but more or all every democracies constitution (at least in spirit)
EDIT: Assuming AI Labs == existing private AI Labs like OpenAI. Something analog to the FCC for AI or similar is a completely different topic. But this wouldn't be called AI Labs as it wouldn't be a AI Lab. But a faster moving, less bureaucratic, commission (or similar group) which works in tight communication with AI Labs. So I'm pretty sure he means giving OpenAI and co. power officially comparable to the government in some sectors. Which means practical including corruption etc. it might be above that of the government.
Governments already use AI labs for surveillance, so, just the ownership will change, the victims will always be the citizens (Eg. see Flock cameras). Nothing gets better.
by this article's argument then government should be second to the power of Internet, telecom, electricity, and even water providers. Government can't do very much if the lights are off, communications don't work and the toilets don't flush. Yet all of those examples either live in fear of, are regulated by, the gov.
> Ball, who recently joined OpenAI as Head of Strategic Futures, has argued that frontier AI labs could become a “counterbalance to government.” Before joining the company, he described the organizations building the most advanced AI systems as a “new kind of institution under the sun.”
Upvoted not because this is an agreeable idea, but so more people see their insanity for what it is.
These people love the stable regulatory environment of the US government, but despise paying their fair share into it. You could say they are not serious, but unfortunately they are.
Of course they think that. Everybody else should be revolted at that thought. We would point and laugh if they weren’t so serious about it, and if this were not resonating with some people in the current American government.
An astute reader of History could comment that they are just mirroring the structure of power in fascist dictatorships.
It is good to see the real game being clarified, and openly admitted to.
Nothing about this technology makes it special. What’s allowing for such conversations is entirely traceable to unsupported claims made by the very companies now looking to cement their control by excluding themselves from all regulation.
A rival to global governmental power. That is the deranged, power hungry goal that is driving the shape of its technology.
Just another scare to gain funding, "because of the implication", overstating their technological impact, conflating scifi with reality. Seems like they aim at overreacting governments, or libertarian plebs to hold the bags this time. C'mon guys, let's do the IPO with crypto, something something Wikileaks!
30 comments of 70
[ 0.27 ms ] story [ 17.0 ms ] thread* Regulatory capture - AI Labs [partially] capture government functions, i.e., take over. In practice this equates to oligarchy.
* Nationalization - Government takes over AI labs through some form of direct or indirect control (e.g., dirigisme).
The article discussion does not seem to consider either of them. And the idea that AI labs would act in the interest of citizens at large seems laughable. In practice it looks like California Forever [0], which is quite the opposite.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Forever
edit: clarity
https://xcancel.com/deanwball/status/2078133895766114412
As complexity/unpredictability rises in any system its natual that govt will shed power. We have already seen this with setting of interest rates.
There is a long list of reasons why the Treasury Dept, President, House, Senate, Supreme Court or NASA doesnt get to set the rate.
Why did they hand over that power to the central bank? Read some financial system evolution history. Mindlessly ambitious people, the kind who run things hardly ever hand over power to someone else unless they see weilding the power puts a giant bulls eye on their head when the inevitable unpredictable/uncontrolable event occurs. Same goes with the Church or Religious institutions. Why does govt stay out of that lane? Why did Italy hand over the Vatican to the Church?
at least in a democracy, even if flawed, power comes from the people, that is the fundamental raison d'être for people allowing a government to exist
this isn't the case of "AI Labs"
what he is proposing is nothing less then establishing at least partial oligarchy, or in other words while indirectly he is relatively openly saying he wants to overthrow not just the US constitution but more or all every democracies constitution (at least in spirit)
EDIT: Assuming AI Labs == existing private AI Labs like OpenAI. Something analog to the FCC for AI or similar is a completely different topic. But this wouldn't be called AI Labs as it wouldn't be a AI Lab. But a faster moving, less bureaucratic, commission (or similar group) which works in tight communication with AI Labs. So I'm pretty sure he means giving OpenAI and co. power officially comparable to the government in some sectors. Which means practical including corruption etc. it might be above that of the government.
But it doesn’t really rival government power, given that the government would most likely crush anything that truly tries to compete.
(and if you don’t have the power to compete, do you truly rival it?)
Upvoted not because this is an agreeable idea, but so more people see their insanity for what it is.
What makes it a lot more fun is that Oracle's existence depends on OpenAI making it through the bubble.
An astute reader of History could comment that they are just mirroring the structure of power in fascist dictatorships.
Nothing about this technology makes it special. What’s allowing for such conversations is entirely traceable to unsupported claims made by the very companies now looking to cement their control by excluding themselves from all regulation.
A rival to global governmental power. That is the deranged, power hungry goal that is driving the shape of its technology.