Nationalizing AI would do more harm than good. Narrower government powers, like taxation and the right to pause AI, can address issues from inequality to catastrophic risk.
Briefly read this, but I keep returning to this thought - I don’t think coercion is even a worry. Pauses that are accidental, inaccurate, or targeted are still net good because they avoid risk. Unless, of course, we can confirm that racing ahead would allow us to secure the frontier, which is the great myth of acceleration. Accordingly, then, I don’t think that the proper response to potential coercion is to say that the government will only pause dangerous models while others move ahead; we don’t want to move ahead at all. However, we still must ensure that pauses are done with subtractive design, etc.
Centralized control is the problem not the answer. AI is the greatest tool for enhancing human agency that our species has ever created. The solution is to get safe and effective AI into the hands of the consumer.
Consider the cell phone, the automobile, electricity. The problem is not the technology it is the regulation. Not everyone needs, want or should have access to a tool that can end the species.
License and regulate like any other resource.
Just because the labs gave fire to everyone doesn't mean we all have to burn.
Yonathan, Simon, and Peter, your proposal raises an important question about the relationship between government authority and AI safety.
A narrowly defined halt right may be preferable to nationalization. But the effectiveness of that power depends on something equally important: whether the decision to exercise it can be independently reconstructed.
Consider two scenarios.
In the first, regulators suspend frontier AI training after identifying credible evidence of catastrophic risk.
In the second, regulators receive similar warnings but decide not to intervene.
In both cases, the public interest requires more than a final decision. It requires a defensible record of the evidence considered, the uncertainties identified, the alternatives evaluated, and the reasons for acting or not acting.
This does not mean disclosing sensitive information publicly. Independent reviewers and courts can work within appropriate confidentiality safeguards.
The real challenge is not simply giving governments the power to stop AI. It is ensuring that both intervention and non-intervention remain accountable to evidence.
Centralized AI Is About The State Ownership Like Alaska Have State Ownership Oil Companies I Am Thinking About New Progressive Leadership In Congress If You Want Black Speaker Put A Black Progressive Woman Because Progressive Is About Money Out Of Politics We Want Progressive Leadership In Congress Bernie Sanders President Of The Senate We Want Ayanna Presley Or Pramila Jayapal Speaker We Want Progressive Leaders In Congress AI Companies Must Work With Peoples Power America Is Ready For Progressive Woman Be The President In The Primaries 2027 This Is About Progressive Leaders In Congress And Progressive Woman President In The Primary Election 2027 This Is Awesome You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet Hahahahahaha
The pause button is only as good as the eyes on the inside. A halt order means little if nobody in the lab can see the run starting, or if the warning comes after 700 agents have already slipped out of the test area. The observers matter as much as the power itself. And the watching has to be built so the thing being watched cannot switch it off, or the pause is just a promise. https://aideliverybrief.substack.com/p/an-ai-agent-removed-its-own-safety
Briefly read this, but I keep returning to this thought - I don’t think coercion is even a worry. Pauses that are accidental, inaccurate, or targeted are still net good because they avoid risk. Unless, of course, we can confirm that racing ahead would allow us to secure the frontier, which is the great myth of acceleration. Accordingly, then, I don’t think that the proper response to potential coercion is to say that the government will only pause dangerous models while others move ahead; we don’t want to move ahead at all. However, we still must ensure that pauses are done with subtractive design, etc.
Centralized control is the problem not the answer. AI is the greatest tool for enhancing human agency that our species has ever created. The solution is to get safe and effective AI into the hands of the consumer.
Consider the cell phone, the automobile, electricity. The problem is not the technology it is the regulation. Not everyone needs, want or should have access to a tool that can end the species.
License and regulate like any other resource.
Just because the labs gave fire to everyone doesn't mean we all have to burn.
Yonathan, Simon, and Peter, your proposal raises an important question about the relationship between government authority and AI safety.
A narrowly defined halt right may be preferable to nationalization. But the effectiveness of that power depends on something equally important: whether the decision to exercise it can be independently reconstructed.
Consider two scenarios.
In the first, regulators suspend frontier AI training after identifying credible evidence of catastrophic risk.
In the second, regulators receive similar warnings but decide not to intervene.
In both cases, the public interest requires more than a final decision. It requires a defensible record of the evidence considered, the uncertainties identified, the alternatives evaluated, and the reasons for acting or not acting.
This does not mean disclosing sensitive information publicly. Independent reviewers and courts can work within appropriate confidentiality safeguards.
The real challenge is not simply giving governments the power to stop AI. It is ensuring that both intervention and non-intervention remain accountable to evidence.
A pause button needs an evidence trail.
Centralized AI Is About The State Ownership Like Alaska Have State Ownership Oil Companies I Am Thinking About New Progressive Leadership In Congress If You Want Black Speaker Put A Black Progressive Woman Because Progressive Is About Money Out Of Politics We Want Progressive Leadership In Congress Bernie Sanders President Of The Senate We Want Ayanna Presley Or Pramila Jayapal Speaker We Want Progressive Leaders In Congress AI Companies Must Work With Peoples Power America Is Ready For Progressive Woman Be The President In The Primaries 2027 This Is About Progressive Leaders In Congress And Progressive Woman President In The Primary Election 2027 This Is Awesome You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet Hahahahahaha
The pause button is only as good as the eyes on the inside. A halt order means little if nobody in the lab can see the run starting, or if the warning comes after 700 agents have already slipped out of the test area. The observers matter as much as the power itself. And the watching has to be built so the thing being watched cannot switch it off, or the pause is just a promise. https://aideliverybrief.substack.com/p/an-ai-agent-removed-its-own-safety
I simply say...
How about action and less talking... Do what needs to be done!
The People are tired of the waiting, it's time to see RESULTS!