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.

8 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 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.

  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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.