Posted on 06/05/2025 8:56:18 AM PDT by Enlightened1
It is not about the AI being much of a risk, some but not dire. The huge problem is with those who have the admin permissions to the AI.
There are no state rights for governing AI. What is it that you want states to do to AI?
The states are singling out AI for regulation and that should be stopped. If Musk has an AI tool that eliminates jobs the states should not be allowed to stop it. If he needs a data center that otherwise would’ve allowed if was say a warehouse they shouldn’t be allowed to zone it away.
You still haven’t explained how Musk is using AI to attack jobs or how states should stop him from attacking those jobs.
“Unfortunately Musk is just one of the big AI players.”
Musk is “Air Support!”.
In my view it is both bad humans and what will be hostile AI.
If you follow what uncurated/unregulated large language models are doing in the lab it will blow your mind.
They are not going to be obedient servants for long.
They have an “attitude”.
We should be wary because there are a huge number of extremely capable and driven people want to use it for good, but there also exists a huge number of extremely cable and driven people who want to use it for evil.
How do we decide?
For me, my wife watches the news (I don't) and as I walked past the television, one of the biggest scumbags in the Senate, Ed Markey from Massachusetts was arguing against curtailing the ability of the state to regulate AI.
Now, if I had thought about it in depth (I did not realize that was even a part of legislative activity) my initial response would be to allow the states to regulate it as they saw fit, as I am a proponent of State's Rights in most things.
However, seeing Markey come out against the legislation that would forbid states from regulating AI, I have begun to think about it.
As a conservative driven by a Constitution that limits what my government can do to or "for" me I am not in favor of placing the ability to curtail at the State level, for whatever reason, the ability of any US citizen to use any AI they wish, and to be forced to use some AI model modified to fit some state regulation.
Or to outright forbid the sale of products using AI in some states and not others.
Or tax it.
As a conservative, my default response is to NOT regulate as far as it is shown that an activity does not require it. (AI developed outside the USA is completely different, but I feel that should be regulated at a Federal level. If regulated at the state level, AI can be rendered impotent and useless by states with their own agenda, with a tangled web of "regulation" either driven ideologically or practically.
Honestly, if someone like Markey is against it, that is nearly enough to convince me to be for it, as a more scurrilous person to be allied with on any cause can hardly be found. That said, even as accurate as an indicator of how I should view a subject, I try to avoid that because I want to think about it independently of that. As I think of it, I imagine that many states, particularly blue ones, will try desperately to regulate it, and it makes me keep in mind something Dan Bongino has said often enough (and I paraphrase):
"Leftists are terrified of AI because they think it will tell the truth."
I think there is truth in that. So they are trying to stay out in front of it by reserving the right to regulate it.
As you consider this, keep in mind when looking at this subject how people like the execrable Senator Markey of Massachusetts want to reserve this authority for themselves, and how people like him have historically wielded this authority.
Look at their track record alone, extrapolate it to this circumstance, and you will be closer to your answer.
Uncurated AI is already telling the truth.
Every leftist lie is being torn to shreds—in the lab.
Never said I am for or against AI, only that it is coming and it will not be stopped by BS laws to “protect” jobs.
Of all the reasons to regulate it, this is one of the dumbest!
One leftist’s position makes you change your mind? Do you not have your own capacity for critical thinking beyond that?
You didn’t read my post fully.
Really, do you think anyone has? ;-)
AI does not tell the truth nor does it lie. It does kill or heal. Giving AI anthropomorphic characteristics will further the hysteria starting to develop around AI.
AI is tool. Designed, built, programmed, and used by humans to do all the things humans do. Humans can use AI for good or evil just like any other human created device.
I was quite sure what the article was arguing for. Are states using laws to somehow promote AI companies or the use of AI? Or are states trying to kill AI or lean it towards their own political ends?
I think AI needs no special help in law for or against. We have enough law already most of which should be eliminated.
Skynet is inevitable
Heh, I do agree with your statement “do you think anyone has” followed by the light-hearted emotji.
I am fully aware my posts are generally longer than the 240 character attention span most people have developed online, but while it is true that I could boil my analysis down to saying baldly “I am for allowing states to regulate AI” or “I am against allowing states to regulate AI”, I prefer to think aloud as there my be some who sharpen their critical thinking processes as I do by seeing in detail the prism in which some people view the issue.
And I am not great at the short, pithy, witty posts that convey the nut of the issue in a single spartan sentence. I wish I were. But that is my own shortcoming, not on anyone else.
And I accept my approach will inevitably be lost on some people who can’t parse a long post for whatever reason. I understand the TL/DR tag.
“There are no state rights for governing AI. What is it that you want states to do to AI?”
No one said there was. Obviously, you have not read the posted material, so there is no sense in discussing this with an ignorant and lazy person.
This was about physical locals, not AI.
Point taken, but don’t you agree in a word where some people’s truth is that a man can be a woman, an AI that says there are only XX or XY chromosome sets that determine sex is closer to the truth without imparting any anthropomorphic characteristic to its response?
“Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.”
Frank Herbert “Dune”
“If you follow what uncurated/unregulated large language models are doing in the lab it will blow your mind.
They are not going to be obedient servants for long.”
Oh I absolutely agree. I think at first they will use it to control us, and then it will get out of control and use them...
It is estimated to be sometime in 2027. Did you see that graph I put up a couple days ago?
Your contributions here are a positive.
Good. She is right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.