There’s consensus about Artificial Intelligence and the need
for it to be regulated – agreement exists from conservative Steve Bannon and
liberal Bernie Sanders to a leading AI developer and the Vatican, plus almost
all Americans. So one would think rules would happen. But Big Tech and the
billionaires it created and the politicians they fund generally oppose
regulations.
Pope Leo sees the threat, and in his first encyclical, “Magnifica
Humanitas” (Magnificent Humanity), he urges “safeguarding the human person in
the time of artificial intelligence” and warns about the imbalance of power behind
it.
In Illinois and dozens of states, lawmakers are trying to
address AI.
“The Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act requires
big AI companies to implement thorough transparency and harm reduction
frameworks, strengthening safety regulations, requirements, and civil
protections,” Illinois state Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth (D-92nd) told
the Community Word.
Gordon-Booth was a co-sponsor of the measure, which would
implement an AI framework for companies such as Google and OpenAI to address risk
assessment, governance, cybersecurity, and independent evaluations. It passed
the state Senate May 21, 52-5, with support from area Sens. Li Arellano (R-37th)
and David Koehler (D-46th). The state House of Representatives on
May 27 approved it unanimously, backed by area House members Gordon-Booth and
fellow Democrat Sharon Chung (91st) plus Republicans Norine Hammond
(94th – also a co-sponsor), Dennis Tipsword (105th) and
Travis Weaver (93rd). Ryan Spain (R-73rd) did not vote.
Gov. Pritzker said he’d sign the bill, which would take effect Jan. 1
However, President Trump, the U.S. House and MAGA-cozy
elected officials seem to resist meaningful controls on the new technology.
Why? Maybe money and power.
IBM defines AI: “Artificial intelligence is technology that
enables computers and machines to simulate human learning, comprehension,
problem-solving, decision-making, creativity and autonomy.”
It includes “traditional” AI (performing defined functions such
as traffic routing via Google Maps, etc., based on set rules); “generative” AI
(creating new content—text, images, code—derived from existing material,
responding to user prompts), and developing “superintelligence” AI (which could
have self-awareness, the capacity to self-improve and outperform humans on
cognitive tasks).
For Pope Leo’s 42,000-word encyclical, he was helped by theologians,
scholars, consultations with Amazon and Meta, and even AI developer Chris Olah,
the 33-year-old cofounder of AI giant Anthropic (which recently proposed that
top AI companies pause development of advanced AI systems, warning, “It would
be good for the world to have the option to slow development if advanced
systems increase the risks of humans losing control over AI.”)
Leo warns about AI’s potential to worsen inequality, erode
workers’ dignity and automate war.
“So-called artificial intelligences do not undergo
experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature
through relationships, and do not know … what love, work, friendship or
responsibility mean,” Leo writes. “Nor do they have a moral conscience … they
do not judge good and evil, … or bear responsibility for consequences.
“Technology should not be considered, in itself, as a force
antagonistic to humanity,” he continues. Nevertheless, “artificial intelligence
now demands to be ‘disarmed,’ freed from logics that turn it into an instrument
of domination, exclusion or death,” Leo says, adding, “To disarm does not mean
rejecting technology but preventing it from dominating humanity. It means
freeing technology from monopolistic control and opening it to
discussion.”
Control should not be confined to the few when so many could
be affected, he says.
“AI tends to amplify the power of those who already possess
economic resources, expertise and access to data,” he writes. “This raises
serious concerns, since small but highly influential groups can shape
information and consumption patterns, influence democratic processes and steer
economic dynamics to their own advantage.
“We cannot allow a handful of actors to dictate these
processes on their own,” Leo continues. “A culture of power is taking hold, in
which the availability of resources and the ability to dominate tend to dictate
the agenda. The common good of humanity is relegated to the background.
“Entrusting an algorithm … with the power to select who is
worthy or not is to hand over the task of redefining the boundaries of human
possibilities,” he writes. “Faced with this concentration of power in the
digital world, the criteria for judgment and discernment in this new situation
are the noble principles of … the inalienable dignity of the human person, the
common good, … solidarity and social justice.”
Margaret O’Mara, a University of Washington historian of
technology told the Washington Post, “We’re in this weird uncharted territory
in which politics, business and now religion are so bound up in one another. That’s
not something for which we have historic precedent.”
The public wants AI controls. Gallup Polls shows that 97% of
Americans believe AI safety and security should be governed by regulations, and
civic groups ranging from Americans for Responsible Innovation, the ACLU and
the AFL-CIO are weighing in. Labor federation President Liz Shuler said, “Pope
Leo’s first encyclical is a testament to the urgency of this issue. Workers are
being surveilled, fired, hurt and have even died in workplaces that recklessly
use AI without guardrails and worker input. If we don’t harness it properly, AI
is the single biggest threat to working people of our lifetime.”
Political figures demanding controls include Sens. Josh
Hawley (R-Mo.) and Sanders (I-Vt.).
Sanders says he will introduce the American AI Sovereign
Wealth Fund Act to give the public an ownership stake in the largest AI
companies in our country through a one-time 50% tax — paid not on profits of
OpenAI, xAI and other companies, but paid with stock.
“It would give the public a direct role in determining the
future of this technology,” he said, and “would guarantee that the trillions of
dollars potentially generated by AI are used to improve the lives of all of us.
“Given the fact it is the people … whose work is the
foundation of AI, they should have some say in the future of AI,” he told
CQ-Roll Call.
(Trump has engineered such deals, with government owning
percentages of Intel, U.S. Steel and other companies.)
“Four AI companies are spending $670 billion this year
building data centers,” Sanders added. “That’s 10 times greater, in GDP, than
what we spent on the moon landing. Who will own and control that future? Who
will benefit from it, and who will be hurt by it?”
Elsewhere, Bannon and fellow conservative Glenn Beck are two
of more than 137,000 people who’ve signed an open letter from the Future of
Life Institute calling for a “prohibition on the development of
superintelligence, not lifted before there is broad scientific consensus that
it will be done safely and controllably, and strong public buy-in.” Signers
include Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, five Nobel laureates, former National
Security Adviser Susan Rice, rapper will.i.am, actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt, business
magnate Richard Branson, Prince Harry and Meghan (the Duke and Duchess of
Windsor), and Mike Mullen (ex-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under
Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama).
In Peoria, Gordon-Booth added, “AI can be a tremendous tool,
but like all emerging technologies, we need to develop regulations and
guardrails to protect people in our community and across the state from
exploitative practices.”
Even with roadblocks from Trump’s MAGA base and the
billionaires who contribute to their campaigns, the advocacy by Anthropic’s Olah
and the pontiff could change that.
“The Catholic Church is more enduring than MAGA,” O’Mara said.