Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Commerce Department is Considering National Security Restrictions on AI (nytimes.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: A common belief among tech industry insiders is that Silicon Valley has dominated the internet because much of the worldwide network was designed and built by Americans. Now a growing number of those insiders are worried that proposed export restrictions could short-circuit the pre-eminence of American companies in the next big thing to hit their industry, artificial intelligence.

In November, the Commerce Department released a list of technologies, including artificial intelligence, that are under consideration for new export rules because of their importance to national security. Technology experts worry that blocking the export of A.I. to other countries, or tying it up in red tape, will help A.I. industries flourish in those nations -- China, in particular -- and compete with American companies.

"The number of cases where exports can be sufficiently controlled are very, very, very small, and the chance of making an error is quite large," said Jack Clark, head of policy at OpenAI, an artificial intelligence lab in San Francisco. "If this goes wrong, it could do real damage to the A.I. community." The export controls are being considered as the United States and China engage in a trade war. The Trump administration has been critical of the way China negotiates deals with American companies, often requiring the transfer of technology to Chinese partners as the cost of doing business in the country. And federal officials are making an aggressive argument that China has stolen American technology through hacking and industrial espionage.

34 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by sinij · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is another chapter in the saga of export-grade cryptography.

    1. Re: Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And why should US conpanies guve technology to any foreign company just because they say it is required to do a deal - there has to be a good reason - the E.U. does not play these stupid games, why would China be allowed to. At a minimum any transfer to a Chinese company of any asset would in my mind require audits up the yin yang along with process controls, ownership rights, and a full understanding of the control structures and conduct of an organization. I think there is plenty of tech and research in the US we do not need to beg China for their scraps

      Just my two cents ;)

    2. Re:Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by bigpat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is another chapter in the saga of export-grade cryptography.

      Bingo... The US will hobble itself in the name of national security and then China will get everything anyway because they have hacked and back doored US IT hardware, firmware and software.

      We need to sort out our issues with China peacefully. I agree with playing hardball up to a point because we can't all just roll over and give up our Liberty and democracy as China takes over the world... but this isn't about allowing China access to US technology, they have everything they need already from hacking and disclosures, a bigger economy to fund additional R&D, and more people to throw at any problem.

      This is about giving US companies the ability to collaborate with the rest of the world without registering their software as a weapon and without the threat of jailing researchers and software developers for just sharing software.

      We should be dealing with China, not threatening US citizens because the US government can't get its shit together.

    3. Re:Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      This is another chapter in the saga of export-grade cryptography.

      Potentially, a more amusing one to watch though. If tech professionals can't agree what exactly AI is- I will find it amusing to watch politicians try.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re: Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Well, in the case of encryption, the NSA pushed to drop the export controls once it became clear that forcing Americans to use weak encryption whenever they might be dealing with foreigners is counter-productive to protecting Americans. When it was just the NSA who could crack DES, they were OK with forcing the rest of the world onto DES. Once other foreign powers acquired the capability, the NSA realized how stupid they were being.

    5. Re: Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, in the case of encryption, the NSA pushed to drop the export controls once it became clear that forcing Americans to use weak encryption whenever they might be dealing with foreigners is counter-productive to protecting Americans. When it was just the NSA who could crack DES, they were OK with forcing the rest of the world onto DES. Once other foreign powers acquired the capability, the NSA realized how stupid they were being.

      It was not the ability to crack encryption that the other countries developed (or, already had). It was the encryption capability itself. You cannot keep mathematics a secret - any county with any mathematicians was perfectly capable of creating much strong encrypion than what was banned by the U.S. And those capabilities and algorithms were open source in the rest of the world. Thus, the ban exporting these from the U.S. was meaningless.

    6. Re:Export-grade cryptography v2.0 by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "peacefully"?
      Korea, Tibet, Taiwan and Vietnam showed how "peaceful" a Communist Party feels towards the USA.
      Communism likes to spread and spy. "Peacefully" is just a decade for their spies to operate better in.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  2. Time to get a new t-shirt by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess it's time to retire the t-shirt with the RSA formula and make a new one with

    y = a[sum(wx+b)] on it.

    1. Re:Time to get a new t-shirt by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      y = a[sum(wx+b)] on it.

      . . . how about:

      ROT13(ROT13(x)) = x for any basic Latin-alphabet text x.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  3. Giving it away is better? by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Technology experts worry that blocking the export of A.I. to other countries, or tying it up in red tape, will help A.I. industries flourish in those nations -- China, in particular -- and compete with American companies.

    So the NYT thinks exporting the technology to other countries after the US made the investment to develop it will stop the other countries - China in particular - from competing. I don't follow that argument.

  4. The Internet by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

    Do these tech industry insiders work for Reynholm Industries? Google, Apple and Facebook are not "the internet".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    The Elders of the Internet would never stand for this nonsense.

    --
    biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
  5. Silly FUD by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >> Technology experts worry that blocking the export of A.I. to other countries, or tying it up in red tape, will help A.I. industries flourish in those nations -- China, in particular -- and compete with American companies

    If you think that China doesn't have other incentives to develop its own AI capabilities already, I have a bridge to sell you. The "embargo of AI = oh noes" is just FUD. And China's already getting pretty good on its own, e.g., https://www.inc.com/magazine/201809/amy-webb/china-artificial-intelligence.html

    1. Re:Silly FUD by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      I agree that the embargo makes absolutely no sense, but we're missing the point if we allow this to become a conversation about whether China has an incentive to develop AI. As you said, they unequivocally do. What this is actually about is whether or not other countries will be incentivized to work with China rather than the US.

      I've never worked there, but I think it's safe to say that Silicon Valley (or, more broadly, the US as a whole) is more or less at the center of the current technological revolution. Because of that, the US (all of it: government, companies, and citizens) has been able to enjoy a number of knock-on benefits. For instance, Silicon Valley draws talent at an international level, giving the US a leg up at maintaining its technological lead. Being at the forefront gives American companies a first-mover advantage in their markets, providing a head start over international competition. Being first also means that you get to define how things work as you go along, meaning that many of the technologies developed in Silicon Valley have become the de facto standards in their respective markets. Supporting the de facto standard from day one (because you invented it) also saves American companies time and effort, since they don't need to retool later to support someone else's way of doing things. And because the US is already doing all of this and is willing to share much of it, the international community (both individuals and countries) have decided to invest in Silicon Valley's efforts by using its services, adopting its technology, and sinking their own time and money into furthering Silicon Valley's R&D efforts even faster. Those investments help propel new development at a faster rate while either growing revenues or reducing the amount of US money that needs to be spent on R&D by American companies, either of which benefits the US.

      TL;DR, it's a virtuous cycle: being at the front draws talent and investment, which drives down costs and speeds development, which helps the US stay at the front.

      If the US makes itself less appealing by establishing an embargo, it'll keep developing these technologies just as China will, sure, but the virtuous cycle may be broken. If that cycle breaks, China may be the one that gets to enjoy the knock-on benefits, which may help place it at the front of the next wave of technological development. That's what the conversation needs to be about.

  6. Those who don't know history by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it"

    Anyone proposing this clearly does not recall the futile attempt to restrict cryptography.

    You cannot ban the export of software; it's simply not possible. If you have a closed development shop, you may be able to keep trade secrets. But publicly known software developments? It's not possible. Software is basically applied mathematics: if the principles are know, anyone can implement them.

    Of course, on /. I'm preaching to the choir...

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Those who don't know history by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 2

      > You cannot ban the export of software; it's simply not possible.

      Yes, it IS possible to ban software export.

      Of course, in reality, such a ban will be worthless, but you can still ban it.

      Just like murder; banned in almost all the world, but it still happens.

    2. Re:Those who don't know history by plague911 · · Score: 1

      "You cannot ban the export of software; it's simply not possible." Yes you can and is done ........ a lot.......... the department of defense has a boat load of software that it does not and will not export for any reason.

      "Software is basically applied mathematics: if the principles are know, anyone can implement them." Easy solution. Don't make the principles publicly known. Again their are a myriad of instances where this has been done before.

    3. Re:Those who don't know history by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Of course when it comes to the current state of the art, the principles are already known. And we have a long way to go before its utility is fully found.

      So all we'd doing is preventing US companies from having a share in the market and fostering more global competition. This would be a net loss to our economy.

    4. Re:Those who don't know history by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The software just exists as a copy on a US base, gov building as a secure university like setting.
      The US gov and mil have done that for decades and information has never risked unexpected "export" due to the merit of the staff and good US security.
      The US allowed its top academic to work in freedom around the USA on a lot of top secret projects for decades.
      Merit to select the best staff, security to ensure they did not sell, spy, give away US secrets.
      A great payment system to ensure they felt able to work on US gov/mil projects full time.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:Those who don't know history by plague911 · · Score: 1

      "And we have a long way to go before its utility is fully found." Not universally true.

      "So all we'd doing is preventing US companies from having a share in the market and fostering more global competition." Not a reasonable assumption actually the exact opposite of what happens. If you prevent the export of fundamental knowledge you ensure that start nation's companies have 100% of the global market.

    6. Re:Those who don't know history by omnichad · · Score: 1

      How do you have the global market of you aren't exporting globally?

  7. Get out by PPH · · Score: 1

    Get out now. If you are considering development of commercial applications in the AI field*, move offshore. Or you will lose access to global markets.

    *Whatever the hell that is.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  8. Exercise in Futility by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 2

    If you ban it, it will simply be stolen and exported to other countries anyway.
    ( I suspect we will be stealing it from other countries as well )

    I know every country is in a race to see who can develop it first because, much like nuclear weapons, it gives the one who finishes
    first a huge advantage over the rest.

    The best course of action is to collaborate with other countries to help ensure AI actually turns into something useful for humanity.
    By combining efforts, it may even shorten the time before we see the birth of a " true " AI.

    1. Re:Exercise in Futility by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      to help ensure AI actually turns into something useful for humanity.

      Ahh, but much like "voting doesn't matter, being the one who COUNTS the votes does" adage, who defines exactly what "useful for humanity" is?

      And even then, what if they change their mind later on, after learning from experience? Is the AI going to agree? What if Colossus (Movie: The Forbin Project) doesn't?

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
  9. Lol...China is leading in AI research.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...and have dedicated more resources to AI than the US has. We are behind.

  10. Dealing with China by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    The US will hobble itself in the name of national security and then China will get everything anyway because they have hacked and back doored US IT hardware, firmware and software.

    There is a way to deal with that short of a full blown war, and that's for Congress to threaten China directly with letters of marque and reprisal. You damn well better believe there would be a redneck/gangbanger floatilla organized at lightning speed if Congress said "we'll legalize privateering if you don't stop raiding our IP."

  11. Yeah, let's revist this by reanjr · · Score: 1

    Sure. Let's revisit the fun and profit that was the encryption wars. It was fun to have an American version of IE that was different from the international version. And who didn't enjoy surreptitious release of crypto research in Europe to get around export controls? All that profit for software developers who get to do the same job twice was super beneficial.

  12. So if as an American university researcher by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    I develop AI on European-hosted or Canadian-hosted AWS servers using a cloud IDE, say, am I exporting AI from the US?

    (Or is this whole idea ludicrous?)

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  13. They are not sending their best by melted · · Score: 1

    Whoever made this suggestion should not be allowed be anywhere near the position in which they can make such restrictions.

  14. Re: The bright side of this by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    Like the great wise lady known as June Cleaver said...

    Cut me some slack, Jack! Chump don' want no help, chump don't GET da help!

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  15. Re:No such thing as American technology by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    Are you joking? There's a reason most of the world now speaks English, and it's not the filthy fucking British wastes of space. All modern technology is American technology.

  16. Hint: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Our liberty and democracy were given up long before the slumbering dragon awakened. The Chinese have simply learned as an oligarchical capitalist cartel how to leverage money, influence, nationalism, and more questionable means to become the established monopoly across the world. Not unlike America has since its 'success' in WW2. And really one might say America post-WW2 was a welfare state supported by the rebuilding needs of the rest of the civilized world, leveraged into an unsustainable economy whose cultural rot has finally begun its downward march in both influence and financial benefits to the common man.

  17. Never work... by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    It'll be a ridiculous joke we are laughed at for and that offers no benefits just like the encryption export restrictions.

  18. Re:No such thing as American technology by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    People come to the USA to get an education and take back US products and services.
    Their governments and nations buy/rent US products/services.
    Their citizens steal US secrets.
    Thats how US developed products and services get to "worldwide" AC.
    The US gov and mil kept great advances confidential for decades.
    Select the right staff, on merit and the US won't be spied on.
    Don't export US tech that has a dual use/is mil only and its all good.
    Only allow trusted 5 eye nations to use advanced US tech under US supervision.
    Thats how the US can keep winning and why other failed nations have to keep spying.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  19. Re:Stupid. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    1. Not when the US gov/mil is paying. Then it belongs to the US gov.
    2. Not when that research is done by the US gov/mil in secret. Good pay, good conditions and the staff have freedom.
    3. US brands can export all the consumer product they want.
    4. Select the best US staff who are loyal to the USA. On merit. Then secrets don't get sold/lost/given to other nations.
    5. Lack of freedom holds back Communist nations.
    6. Size and gov/mil support does not innovate under Communism like with the mil/gov freedom granted in the USA.
    7. The US gov/mil is paying the US "market" so it can have the needed secrecy and innovation. Win, win.
    The "semiconductor industry" was a thing in the 1970's.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"