This is a good point. Nationalization is hard and complex, and it would probably slow progress—and the current administration would be against it on general principles, as you say.
But I think people are underestimating the government’s flexibility and willingness to exert control when things get weird and dangerous. Governments typically do just that. Even Soft Nationalization: How the US Government Will Control AI Labs underestimates this; perhaps this would happen in long timelines, but I think there are more direct but still easy routes to control when things heat up and the bright boys in national security realize what’s going on.
I expect a “softer nationalization” of the government just asking politely to be included in deliberations among org leadership. Existing emergency act procedures very likely apply as soon as you take AGIs security implications seriously. They don’t have to nationalize in any strong sense to exert control over the technology. Anyone being asked politely by the NSA to do something they could legally demand would be wise to comply, or at least appear to comply.
Thanks! The linked article is exactly what I was looking for. Assuming “nationalization” means something like “soft nationalization” does make the timeline seem a lot more plausible.
This is a good point. Nationalization is hard and complex, and it would probably slow progress—and the current administration would be against it on general principles, as you say.
But I think people are underestimating the government’s flexibility and willingness to exert control when things get weird and dangerous. Governments typically do just that. Even Soft Nationalization: How the US Government Will Control AI Labs underestimates this; perhaps this would happen in long timelines, but I think there are more direct but still easy routes to control when things heat up and the bright boys in national security realize what’s going on.
I expect a “softer nationalization” of the government just asking politely to be included in deliberations among org leadership. Existing emergency act procedures very likely apply as soon as you take AGIs security implications seriously. They don’t have to nationalize in any strong sense to exert control over the technology. Anyone being asked politely by the NSA to do something they could legally demand would be wise to comply, or at least appear to comply.
Thanks! The linked article is exactly what I was looking for. Assuming “nationalization” means something like “soft nationalization” does make the timeline seem a lot more plausible.