YouCongress Polls

We cannot ignore the danger of a race to the bottom between competing tech companies or between states, rogue or otherwise. A moratorium and binding international regulation of ASI is, frankly, our only hope, however hard it will be to agree. It will...

If somebody says, 'This technology is so powerful that we need a global treaty to slow it down,' then I would say: Then take your foot off the accelerator yourself if you think it's moving too fast.

The United States is once again demonstrating what we Liberals and Democrats have warned about so many times since Trump entered into office; that the US holds a real 'kill-switch' over essential technologies and that they are more than willing to us...

Governments are on track to spend more than $1 trillion by 2030 chasing a sovereign stack, the full range of hardware and capabilities necessary to deploy and operate AI infrastructure. [...] In an interdependent system, the question shifts from how ...

OpenAI has long believed there should ultimately be an international organization that helps coordinate leading AI efforts to reduce catastrophic risk. One goal of such an organization should be to make it possible for the world to take coordinated a...

This would be practically impossible, because the economic and national security stakes are simply too high for any superpower to willingly hit the brakes now. [...] Tracking decentralized computing resources, private data centers and algorithmic res...

Today, we announced the first-in-the-nation state-led lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman. OpenAI and Altman ignored internal and external safety warnings, put children at great risk, and allowed a dangerous product to reach millions of Fl...

SB-1047 holds liable [...] the original developer of that model. It is impossible [...] to predict every possible use. SB-1047 will force developers to pull back [...].

While we would applaud any serious effort to regulate potentially dangerous AI technologies, any attempt to tie the hands of states in their efforts to keep working people safe is not acceptable. We oppose preemption of state authority to regulate th...

Rather than allow protections to exist in only a handful of states or force innovators to navigate dozens of different legal regimes, our framework would establish one national standard.

Frontier AI models, like airplanes, should be required to go through technical testing and auditing, and their release should be blocked or reversed as a threat to public safety if they do not meet high standards of safety.

Finally, it’s not clear how well some of the act’s provisions reflect the current state of the AI ecosystem. The act demands that labs hire an independent third party to complete an annual audit of their protocols to ensure compliance with the act. T...

This means that in 2026-2027 we could end up in one of two starkly different worlds. In the US, multiple companies will definitely have the required millions of chips (at the cost of tens of billions of dollars). The question is whether China will al...

Back in 2022, I supported the Biden chip-export controls on China. After a week with Chinese AI researchers and tech leaders, I've changed my mind. The controls are not working, and they obstruct another strategy that just might work. [...]

Failure, in their eyes, means being left behind while AI automates large swaths of white-collar work – especially coding jobs, which until now have been a veritable licence to print money – and falling into the ranks of the permanent poor.

the evidence on how AI is affecting the labor market today is inconclusive, and claims about harmful impacts on particular groups of workers are premature.

Unless AI's rise is accompanied by an edict that people can no longer pursue new companies or initiatives, then the technology can't be a subjugation machine without some accompanying rise in empowerment. [...] Unless you're brutally pessimistic abou...

If policymakers are worried about the most advanced systems, then oversight should focus on the highest-capability end of the stack. Commerce already moved in this direction when BIS proposed reporting requirements for advanced AI models and large co...

According to the proposed rule, a covered US person will be required to provide quarterly reports to BIS if the US person “engages in, or plans, within six months, to engage in ‘applicable activities.’” “Applicable activities” include: “Conducting a...

Establishing a pre-release review or licensing regime for AI companies would grant the government, particularly the executive branch, significant control over AI technologies that could hinder innovation or control expression. [...] Such an approach ...

The claim that AI will produce economy-wide, permanent unemployment is unhelpful marketing, bad economics and worse history. To the contrary, productivity gains should increase demand for labor, because labor becomes more valuable.

the evidence on how AI is affecting the labor market today is inconclusive, and claims about harmful impacts on particular groups of workers are premature.

[AI's rise is] dead certain to eliminate jobs.

AI has gone from "dumber than a child" to "expert level" in a few years in many domains. The gap between "expert level" and "above top geniuses" is smaller, so we expect it to take less time. This has been a pattern in fields like chess and Go, where...

Plot the same improvements on a linear y-axis and you get steady incremental gains, impressive but not the hockey stick that triggered the panic. [...] We don't have evidence that Mythos is actually an important step towards broad superintelligence.

If AI doesn't kill us, and there's no permanent dictatorship, and there's no permanent underclass, then we get a post-scarcity society, plus superintelligent AIs that we can set to working on other problems like disease and social decay.

So when people predict a high degree of existential risk from AGI, I don’t actually think “arguing back” on their chosen terms is the correct response. Radical agnosticism is the correct response, where all specific scenarios are pretty unlikely. Non...

AI has become the new climate change. It's this imminent catastrophe that is requiring all this government intervention. But there's very little evidence to support it.

[My policy chief's remarks amounted to] a review of a plan to distribute the national excess tax revenue generated from excess profits in the AI sector to the public as a citizen's dividend.

[The national dividend proposal is] an anti-market idea that goes against market principles and is no different from socialist-style distribution.

It would create a sovereign wealth fund through a one-time 50 percent tax — not on the profits of OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI and other companies, but paid with something far more valuable than that: the stock. [...] the billions, if not trillions, of dol...

Even if taking partial ownership of frontier AI companies can make sense on paper, in practice it's a recipe for political favoritism and corruption.

AI leaders keep saying UBI is necessary. This pledge asks them to prove it. [...] We all deserve a share of what it makes possible.

I'm skeptical that Universal Basic Income can get rid of grinding poverty, since somehow humanity's 100-fold productivity increase (since the days of agriculture) didn't eliminate poverty.

I no longer believe in universal basic income as much as I once did. I'm much more interested in ways where we think about kind of collective ownership. [...] [A] fixed cash payment, although useful and maybe a good idea in some ways, does not get at...