Slashdot Mirror
Department of Commerce Could Be the First US Entity To Broadly Regulate an Aspect of AI (qz.com)
Dave Gershgorn and Max de Haldevang, writing for Quartz: Artificial intelligence technology has the capability to be the most impactful software advance in history and the US government has no idea how to properly regulate it. The US does know that it doesn't want other countries using its own AI against it. A new proposal published this week by the Department of Commerce lists wide areas of AI software [PDF] that could potentially require a license to sell to certain countries. These categories are as broad as "computer vision" and "natural language processing." It also lists military-specific products like adaptive camouflage and surveillance technology.
The small number of countries these regulations would target includes a big name in AI: China. Donald Trump, who has placed tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods as part of a simmering trade war, has long railed against China's alleged theft of intellectual property. This proposal looks like a warning from US officials, just as Chinese president Xi Jinping aims to boost AI in his own country. "This is intended to be a shot across the bow, directed specifically at Beijing, in an attempt to flex their muscles on just how broad these restrictions could be," says R. David Edelman, a former adviser to president Barack Obama who leads research on technology and public policy issues at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The small number of countries these regulations would target includes a big name in AI: China. Donald Trump, who has placed tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods as part of a simmering trade war, has long railed against China's alleged theft of intellectual property. This proposal looks like a warning from US officials, just as Chinese president Xi Jinping aims to boost AI in his own country. "This is intended to be a shot across the bow, directed specifically at Beijing, in an attempt to flex their muscles on just how broad these restrictions could be," says R. David Edelman, a former adviser to president Barack Obama who leads research on technology and public policy issues at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
export regulations worked so well with crypto...
> require a license to sell to certain countries. These categories are as
> broad as "computer vision" and "natural language processing."
Can they be any more vague?
What do they mean by 'technologies'? Do they mean finished products? Or code available on GitHub? What if the GitHub code is not "sold" ? Do they mean training data sets? Or specific trained neural nets that can be loaded into compatible hardware (or software) to run it and recognize things?
Computer Vision or Speech Recognition (not 'natural language processing') are basic tech, like microprocessors, or fuel injectors. Like not selling them any sheet metal which could be used to make missiles used against us, instead of using it to make dish washers.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.