YouCongress Polls

I'm somebody that believes that there always must be a human involved in the kill chain, and that we should not be making decisions to take lives based on an AI algorithm. We need to be able to make those decisions as humans, and those are discussion...

Personal view: I admire @AnthropicAI sticking by their principles but disagree with the principle itself. Putin won't fight fair so we should have autonomous AI weapons for sure.

I think, in fact, AI is going to create a labor shortage.

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.

I believe that millions of white-collar workers are going to lose their jobs in the next 12 to 18 months due to AI. [...] AI is now able to do the work of a very, very smart human in minutes or even seconds. This is going to displace marketers, coder...

The public has got to have a significant seat at the table to make sure that terrible things do not happen to ordinary people, and that in fact, AI benefits ordinary people, not hurts them.

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...

America should lead the world in artificial intelligence, not regulate ourselves into falling behind China through a patchwork of fifty different state laws.

The simplest form of treaty would be something like this, that the countries agree that if they do develop advanced AI: * That it will be done in a safe way. So maybe using techniques like Scientist AI or whatever else we have strong assurances for. ...

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 ...

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 [...].

US export controls on frontier chips and SME to China have been a major contributor to the US’s overall lead in AI, and these policies need to be expanded, tightened, and coordinated with other likeminded states.

coerced or courted some countries to adopt export restrictions against China. [...] Such bullying acts seriously violate market principles and the international trade order

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...

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...

The concept of superintelligence is built on a flawed premise. The idea is that once you have an intelligence that is as good or better than humans — in other words, AGI — then that intelligence can improve itself, leading to a runaway effect. This i...

A good pause strategy would involve both sides being able to monitor the other's data centers to prevent illegal training, then limiting training to some slow mutually-agreeable rate that lets alignment researchers thoroughly test each generation of ...

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...

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.

[We] have to be very careful about how we come to [AI's] employment and its inspiration into the delivery of lethality. [...] We, as humans, have to have the confidence that it's going to deliver violence only where we intend it to be delivered.

We are approaching a runaway to superintelligence that could threaten our shared human future. Both publicly and privately, AI companies are recognizing that a pause or slowdown in certain developmental pathways is crucial to protect lives and liveli...

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.

The fruits of the AI infrastructure era are not the outcome of individual companies alone, but are built on the industrial foundation that the entire nation has accumulated over the past half-century. [...] Part of those fruits should be structurally...

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