Highlights: The White House issued draft rules today that would require federal agencies to evaluate and constantly monitor algorithms used in health care, law enforcement, and housing for potential discrimination or other harmful effects on human rights.

Once in effect, the rules could force changes in US government activity dependent on AI, such as the FBI’s use of face recognition technology, which has been criticized for not taking steps called for by Congress to protect civil liberties. The new rules would require government agencies to assess existing algorithms by August 2024 and stop using any that don’t comply.

  • Cris@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I mean that broadly seems like a good thing. Execution is important, but on paper this seems like the kind of forward thinking policy we need

    • pandacoder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Quite frankly it didn’t put enough restrictions on the various “national security” agencies, and so while it may help to stem the tide of irresponsible usage by many of the lesser-impact agencies, it doesn’t do the same for the agencies that we know will be the worst offenders (and have been the worst offenders).

  • KeraKali@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “If the benefits do not meaningfully outweigh the risks, agencies should not use the AI,” the memo says. But the draft memo carves out an exemption for models that deal with national security and allows agencies to effectively issue themselves waivers if ending use of an AI model “would create an unacceptable impediment to critical agency operations.”

    This tells me that nothing is going to change if people can just say their algoriths would make them too inefficient. Great sentiment but this loophole will make it useless.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Democrats are so fucking naive. They actually think that a system of permission slips is sufficient to protect us from the singularity.

      OpenAI’s original mission, before they forgot it, was the only workable method: distribute the AI far and wide to establish a multipolar ecosystem.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Great sentiment but

      It’s not a “great sentiment” - it’s essentially just more of the same liberal “let’s pretend we care by doing something completely ineffective” posturing and little else.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I swear to god there has to be an entire chapter in Gödel Escher Bach about how this is literally impossible.

  • kapx132@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Watchmen watching over themselves, what could possibly go wrong right?

  • paf0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Interesting. I want algorithms to warn us about potential harms by Joe Biden. What if we were able to fund an AI run by the GAO that can tell us when government decisions make the majority of our lives worse?

    It’s a long way off and might be a bad idea to trust an AI outright, but I just wish we had a more data informed government.

    • Syringe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      You might be interested in data.gov. The Obama admin kicked of the Government Open Data Initiative to provide transparency in government. Agencies have been given a means to publish their data, which US taxes pay for. You’d be surprised what’s in there. It’s not an algorithm, but you could certainly build one from that if you wanted to.

  • db2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    62
    ·
    11 months ago

    Joe Biden probably has no idea what most of those words mean, let’s be honest here. He’s only the president because the only other option we were given was worse.

    • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t want somebody that knows and understands everything. I want somebody that surround themselves with people that collectively know and understand, and can then explain it to him like he’s an octogenarian.

    • Motavader@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      So what? The biggest part of picking a President is the people they’re going to put in their cabinet and surround themselves with. That’s the problem with Trump. He’s going to fill the presidency with a bunch of maga ass hats, on top of doing his own damage.

    • 5BC2E7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Just because some of us understand this issue better than him it doesn’t mean that we should expect him to understand everything at the same level as if he worked in the area… it’s impossible he can’t be an expert economist, computer scientist, anthropologist, chemist, biologist, etc… rolled into one.

      For the record I don’t think he is a great president.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        You cannot judge how great a President was until long after they are out of office. Good things usually take time. Bad things can be immediate.

        • 5BC2E7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yea. But he doesn’t seem to have a vision. I don’t think corruption is great and bidenomics is just bullshit. I am not saying he is the worst ever just that it’s not very good.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m not sure what you’re looking for with a “vision.” Sounds like something a populist does and fails at. Biden has to fix all the shit Trump and the Republicans ruined and he won’t likely have time for a lot else. If he can get control of Congress next year by a good margin it’ll help.

            • 5BC2E7@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              To give you an example he might claim to want to curb the corruption by changing and limiting donations to political candidates/organizations. The populist vapid version of this would be something vague but catchy like “drain the swamp” that can mean anything.

                • 5BC2E7@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Ok if you could not understand that was an example I think Im good with my current opinion.

    • dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      He’s only the president because the only other option we were given was worse.

      Not if you ask the freaks in /r/neoliberal. They think he’s the best president ever and that his only problem is a bad PR team lmao

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        He’s absolutely fine, and the vast majority of complaints I’ve seen fundamentally misunderstand the limits of the Presidency and why an experienced politician has rightful reasons to be cautious about the consequences of radical actions. Populists love to fill your head up with great ideas, but gloss over or ignore the consequences. Some end up lying about it others aren’t effective. Experienced politicians aren’t flashy but get things done step by step.

        • dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          He’s absolutely fine if you don’t care about unconditional support for a genocidal apartheid state or the right to strike. Those are both cases where doing literally nothing would have been better than what he personally did.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Gaza–Israel is a hugely complicated situation. Let Hamas get away with it and you show their backers that they can get away with attacks like these. The Biden administration works behind the scenes more than out in public. We won’t know what they are saying to the Israelis. It’s a proxy war with no good solution. What are you referring to specifically?

  • bioemerl@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    54
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    As long as he doesn’t start getting in the way of open source algorithms were fine.

    Delay llama 3 and I’m voting for whoever runs against Biden. No exceptions, I will become a single issue voter and this will be my issue.

    • The Assman@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Pretty dumb dawg. The people running against him want christofascism. Not becoming the Christian version of Iran is my single issue.

      • bioemerl@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        35
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Nope, this is the most important issue for me. It overrides all other concerns.

        • deur@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I sure hope you are a strawman account because you are an idiot if this is who you are.

          • bioemerl@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            11 months ago

            The idiot is the person who votes based on other people’s priorities.

            If you want to believe garbage about some impending Christian fascist state you’re more than welcome to, but reality is quite a bit more mundane.

                • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Aint doomer, just a very big follower of hope for the best prepare for the worst. Has kept my kin and ancestor alive in the past will do the same in the future. But then again I aint the retard who’s more worried about useless tech junk that’ll probably have minimum effect on society as whole.

                  I probably wont convince ya of jack and or shit, but what I can do is point out that not looking out for other folks usually ends badly for people. A shunned man is a deadman.

    • krellor@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think you have anything to worry about. All this requires is that any models used by the government are tested for bias. Which is a good thing.

      Go ask an early generation ai image generator to make pictures of people cleaning and it will give you a bunch of pictures of women. There are all sorts of examples of racial, sex, and religious biases in the models because of the data they were trained on.

      Requiring the executive agencies to test for bias is a good thing.

      • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The same way they do it with crypto bullshit I’d imagine. Prosecute people for export.

        Edit: my bad. Daddy government can only do good. That’s why we support Israel.

          • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            If you’ve got a better reason you look like you use boot polish for lipstick I’m all ears.

            The government using export restrictions (and any other law they can try to make apply) to enrich corporations isn’t fucking new.

            • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              If you’ve got an actual argument to argue against instead of looking like a lead paint chip to a retard I’m all ears.

          • bioemerl@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            11 months ago

            Is there something confusing in that sentence? The US has already banned the export of cards above a certain speed to China. It would be simple to extend that control.

    • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      This will entrench big tech in federal government, but I’m not too worried about limits on the government.

      • bioemerl@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, the only concern I have so far is the leverage of the defense powers act to require foundational model development to sent red team results to the Fed. That’s a hint that will enable them to ban release of models in the future.