In the US the private sector is reponsible for the development. At least this is what they say. I am not entirely sure whether that's the full truth.
I read two Foreign Affair articles on AI. This one was really interesting.
I will copy only a few passages.
MAXING OUT
It is easy to see why Washington's light-touch approach to AI has, by and large, paid dividends. Past revolutionary technologies, such as nuclear weapons and space flight, did not have immediate commercial applications. But the business case for modern AI is already highly compelling. AI firms have found huge user demand, resulting in skyrocketing revenues, and they have promised to automate myriad valuable tasks, such as coding. As a result, capital markets are funding AI projects at scales that would historically have required government resources. Moreover, the computation-centric nature of today's AI means that it builds neatly on the cloud computing infrastructure that the private sector, not the government, has mastered.
The sufficiency of private-sector capital in enabling AI advances is wonderful for taxpayers, but the limits of this approach are becoming apparent. To see why, look at infrastructure. The vast fleets of computer chips needed to develop and use today's AI require extraordinary amounts of energy, so U.S. companies will need more power to fuel the data centers they plan to build in the coming years.
My comment: The US was involved in the invention of most groundbreaking, disruptive technologies of the past. The internet, nuclear weapons, space flight and much more. They argue that the one who is leading the AI race will also have an advantage in geopolitics. And it is true Europeans are disadvantaged and too dependent on the US. I think the US intelligence services could profit from that technology too. (they probably already do). But I am not sure whether they would really be that helpful in advancing the technology. The fundamental research for AI was also done in Europe. But we don't have a business case. We lack venture capital and the best talents go to US tech companies. I think the deveopment of AI should be better regulated. But the Trump administration has a completely different approach.
I read two Foreign Affair articles on AI. This one was really interesting.
I will copy only a few passages.
MAXING OUT
It is easy to see why Washington's light-touch approach to AI has, by and large, paid dividends. Past revolutionary technologies, such as nuclear weapons and space flight, did not have immediate commercial applications. But the business case for modern AI is already highly compelling. AI firms have found huge user demand, resulting in skyrocketing revenues, and they have promised to automate myriad valuable tasks, such as coding. As a result, capital markets are funding AI projects at scales that would historically have required government resources. Moreover, the computation-centric nature of today's AI means that it builds neatly on the cloud computing infrastructure that the private sector, not the government, has mastered.
The sufficiency of private-sector capital in enabling AI advances is wonderful for taxpayers, but the limits of this approach are becoming apparent. To see why, look at infrastructure. The vast fleets of computer chips needed to develop and use today's AI require extraordinary amounts of energy, so U.S. companies will need more power to fuel the data centers they plan to build in the coming years.
My comment: The US was involved in the invention of most groundbreaking, disruptive technologies of the past. The internet, nuclear weapons, space flight and much more. They argue that the one who is leading the AI race will also have an advantage in geopolitics. And it is true Europeans are disadvantaged and too dependent on the US. I think the US intelligence services could profit from that technology too. (they probably already do). But I am not sure whether they would really be that helpful in advancing the technology. The fundamental research for AI was also done in Europe. But we don't have a business case. We lack venture capital and the best talents go to US tech companies. I think the deveopment of AI should be better regulated. But the Trump administration has a completely different approach.
