White House Takes New Steps To Study AI Risks, Determine Impact on Workers (reuters.com) 27
The White House said on Tuesday it would ask workers how their employers use artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor them, as it allocates federal investments in the technology, which is expected to change the nature of work. From a report: The White House will hold a listening session with workers to understand their experience with employers' use of automated technologies for surveillance, monitoring and evaluation. The call will include gig work experts, researchers, and policymakers. Millions of users have tried AI apps and tools, which supporters say can make medical diagnoses, write screenplays, create legal briefs and debug software, leading to growing concern about how the technology could lead to privacy violations, skew employment decisions, and power scams and misinformation campaigns. As part of its evaluation of the technology, the administration will also announce new steps, including an updated roadmap for federal investments in AI research, a request for public input on AI risks and with a new report from the Department of Education on how AI affects teaching, learning and research.
In other news... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe they can make AI the new head of the Ministry of Truth...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne... [dailymail.co.uk]
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Informative)
Repeat after me, the Daily Fail is not a source of news.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine if only there was some kind of ministry that would determine what is true or not so you wouldn't have to think for yourself.
Just a tool (Score:4, Informative)
The LLMs are just tools. The typewriter and the word processor also changed the nature of text generation. ChatGPT is just a more advanced tool.
Seriously, the hype is crazily exaggerated. LLMs are not intelligent, or even close. Useful? Sure, used with care. Dangerous? Only in the sense that stupid people use tools in stupid ways.
Re: (Score:2)
The LLMs are just tools. The typewriter and the word processor also changed the nature of text generation. ChatGPT is just a more advanced tool.
Seriously, the hype is crazily exaggerated. LLMs are not intelligent, or even close. Useful? Sure, used with care. Dangerous? Only in the sense that stupid people use tools in stupid ways.
Have you looked around lately? Notice anything? Stupid people everywhere, doing stupid things. Washington is especially ripe with them.
You should be terrified of what the LLMs are currently capable of, because some idiot with the financial backing, or the force of the government, or both, will put one of these dumbass things into a decision making tree where there will be real consequences due to the hype machine driving them to a near religious / cult-like belief in the god-like power of the AIs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A solipsist might claim that there is no meaningful difference between intelligence and the appearance of intelligence. After all, I have no evidence that you are an intelligent being rather than an advanced script. But your words are going to have the same effects on my mind and my way of thinking, regardless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The WH has no power here (Score:4, Interesting)
Those indolent workers aren't going to just wander off and quietly starve to death...
History is filled with rich and powerful people that couldn't imagine any other scenario. "They're lazy and stupid. They'll just slink off and die." This is typically followed by revolution. Though I'm sure the current decision makers feel extremely safe with the military behind them. Except, they haven't thought through that until the military is completely computer controlled, it's still filled with people, many of which will be relatives and/or friends of the indolent workers in question. Hmm.
You can't beat a modern military (Score:2)
This is one of those times in your life where you need to solve the problem before it happens because by the time it happens it's too late.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't beat a modern military
Too bad you weren't there to tell the Viet Cong. Or the Taliban, for that matter. Or Al-Qaeda. Or the IRA.
Re: (Score:2)
So best case scenario you get a military junta. Don't count on revolution saving you it's only going to make things worse. This is one of those times in your life where you need to solve the problem before it happens because by the time it happens it's too late.
And I'm here to tell you it won't be solved. All resources are currently being poured into increasing profits for those who have plenty, and telling those that have to work for a living that it'll all be fine if they just keep their nose to the grindstone and don't speak up about the looming disaster. When we're shoved out of work, they may notice when the profits slow, though the likely reaction will be to tell us to get back to work, whether there are jobs or not.
Violence is going to come. And I'm not say
Re: (Score:2)
Office of Technology Assessment (Score:2)
I guess it was a great idea to kill the OTA back in 1995.... I mean their whole purpose was to do these types of "big idea" philosophical types of thinking instead of the tech giants doing it for us.
But hey, whatever.... :p
Such bold action. (Score:2)
How would they know? (Score:2)
I have no idea how my company uses AI to monitor us. Except for senior leadership and a select number of people in IT and HR, how would any of us know how AI is being used to track our behavior?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know either - but if they can work it out, then they can roll it out across government much more easily.
Using AI or not using AI for surveillance makes no difference to anything, unless you're the watcher. AI hopefully makes the surveillance more efficient, but it doesn't change the outcome - the peons are all being watched, all of the time. That time you were picking your nose at your desk is on video somewhere, and it can be found - either by spending some person-hours, or by setting an AI onto th
So what are they doing? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Queue up next amusing "word salad".
[then cringe]
I feel better already (Score:2)
I gue$$ the big question i$ who paid the mo$t into the mo$t congre$$critter$ re-election fund$. Cuz out$ide of $tupid religiou$ reason$ like abortion that'$ how these a$$hole$ decide who and what to $upport.
Foot-dragging? (Score:1)
"The White House plans to prepare to take steps to form a committee to study the taking of steps to assess potential AI risks."