TL;DR:
- A recent poll reveals that 63% of Americans favor regulations to prevent the development of superintelligent AI (AGI).
- While tech companies like OpenAI pursue AGI for the greater good, public opinion questions its necessity.
- The political dimension of AGI development is underemphasized; democratic input and oversight are crucial.
- The norm of “permissionless invention” in tech may need reconsideration as AGI’s impact on society is immense.
- Precedents from international treaties suggest the need for global oversight and consensus on AGI development.
- The public’s perspective should inform the direction of AGI policy, though not the specifics.
Main AI News:
In the race towards developing superintelligent AI, a crucial question looms large in the minds of Americans: do we truly desire this technological leap? This query has surfaced prominently in a recent poll, exclusively shared with Vox, conducted by the AI Policy Institute in collaboration with YouGov. The results reveal a striking stance: a resounding 63 percent of respondents believe that regulatory measures should actively strive to hinder the emergence of AI superintelligence.
Prominent companies like OpenAI have unabashedly articulated their pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a form of AI surpassing human intellect. Their mission, as stated on OpenAI’s website, underscores the aim to ensure that AGI serves the greater good of humanity. Yet, the paradox lies in the fact that despite the colossal risks associated with AGI, a select group of CEOs has made the unilateral decision to push forward its development without soliciting public consensus.
The current discourse primarily revolves around how to control a potentially superhuman intelligence rather than addressing the fundamental question of whether we should pursue it at all. This underlying assumption deserves scrutiny, as it potentially neglects our collective ability to decide whether AGI should even be on the table.
The endeavor to build AGI is profoundly political in nature, and it demands a corresponding level of political engagement. Surprisingly, this aspect remains underemphasized. Technological solutionism, a belief that technology can solve humanity’s most profound problems, has played a pivotal role in concentrating power within the tech sector. While this concept may seem contemporary, it traces its roots back to medieval times when technology was heralded as a means of achieving salvation.
In contemporary America, the convergence of profit-driven capitalism and geopolitical narratives has propelled tech accelerationism to its zenith. Silicon Valley, in particular, has embraced this notion enthusiastically. AGI enthusiasts promise transformative benefits, from medical breakthroughs to cleaner energy solutions and heightened productivity. However, skepticism has grown, fueled by the turbulent impact of social media and the stark warnings of CEOs like Sam Altman, who foresee mass unemployment and economic upheaval as potential consequences.
The AI Policy Institute/YouGov poll presents a compelling case against the argument that “it’s better for us to have it than them” when it comes to AGI. Strikingly, in all iterations of the question, the majority of respondents rejected this perspective. The American public, it seems, is wary of embracing a technology they believe could cause them harm.
Despite the resonance of these concerns among the populace, the direction of society remains largely dictated by technologists and their creations. Their closed-door discussions in Washington, devoid of public participation, exemplify the undemocratic nature of this decision-making process.
Elke Schwarz, a political theorist, emphasizes that the development of AGI should not be perceived as an inevitable outcome but rather as a conscious political choice. The desire for societal change inherent in AGI development necessitates democratic input and oversight.
The central question emerges: should AI companies be granted the power to radically reshape our world without obtaining prior consent? Even AI developers themselves are expressing discomfort with the undemocratic nature of AI’s evolution.
As we navigate this transformative era, it becomes imperative to reconsider the norm of “permissionless invention.” In an age where AI has the potential to affect all of humanity, seeking consensus poses a unique challenge. Historical examples of pivotal inventions, such as the printing press or the telegraph, were not subjected to societal consent due to technological constraints and limited communication.
However, when technology holds the power to alter the course of human civilization, mechanisms for global oversight and democratic input must be explored. Existing treaties, like the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the Outer Space Treaty, offer precedents for such deliberation and collaboration.
The same principles should apply to AGI, a technology with the potential to reshape our world profoundly. As we grapple with the ethical dimensions of AGI, it is crucial to remember that the opinions of the American public, regardless of their familiarity with AI, deserve consideration.
In the words of an old Roman proverb, “what touches all should be decided by all.” This dictum holds true for superintelligent AI, just as it does for matters of nuclear weapons, chemical arms, or interstellar communications. While voters may not dictate the specifics of problem-solving, their input on the direction of society should be earnestly sought by policymakers.
In the grand quest for superintelligent AI, the journey should be as democratic as the destination is transformative.
Conclusion:
The poll results indicate a significant disconnect between public sentiment and elite discourse regarding AGI. The unease expressed by the American public underscores the need for more inclusive and democratic decision-making in the AGI development process. This shift in perspective may influence the market by pushing AI companies to prioritize transparency, ethical considerations, and public consent in their pursuit of AGI, potentially impacting investment and innovation in the AI industry.
