A little AI is good Too much is dangerous

In The Progressive, Marc Rosenthal and Julie Derwinski argued “we must rise to meet the AI threat.”

“One reason AI is dangerous is that, unlike conventional computer programs, it does not just follow instructions written by people. Instead, developers feed advanced AI systems enormous amounts of data and let them build their own internal patterns for solving problems. Even their creators cannot fully explain or predict what those systems may do in every situation,” Rosenthal and Derwinski wrote. “In controlled cybersecurity evaluations, advanced AI agents have crossed supposedly secure boundaries, reaching the open Internet and breaking into the computers of outside organizations.”

“People of all political persuasions should demand a moratorium on new facilities and additional computing capacity intended to train the largest frontier models until enforceable standards for safety, environmental protection, and transparency are in place,” Rosenthal and Derwinski said. “The public must assert its authority while it still can. Where safety cannot be demonstrated, development should stop."

It is already difficult to know what is true and what is a lie on the Internet. We might need to police ourselves and stay away from AI until we know that safety measures are indeed working. But what can we do if the government doesn't get something done soon to keep this monster from wrecking things? 

But do they know what to do? These AI companies have said they must slow down, so maybe our representatives in office will work across the aisle and let those who built AI show them how to stop the dangerous practices.