AI - Can the US government do this correctly and promptly?

Original Article: https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/21/tech/schumer-ai-plan/index.html 

The article discusses Senator Schumer's plan for how the U.S. Senate will regulate artificial intelligence (AI). Schumer has outlined a deliberate approach to legislation, emphasizing the importance of familiarizing lawmakers with the technology and the issues it raises before seeking to legislate. He intends to utilize committee chairs and lawmakers who are vocal about AI to create legislation based on panel discussions. Schumer believes that if the U.S. constructs this in a serious manner, it could surpass existing regulatory proposals from around the world, potentially leading the direction of AI regulation globally【7†source】.

In his speech, Schumer acknowledges the criticism he has received for his slow pace, but he insists that AI is a novel issue for which Congress lacks a guide, comparing it to other areas such as labor, healthcare, or defense where they have a long history to base decisions on. He sees this process as a foundational work for AI policy that will have to accomplish years' worth of work in a matter of months【8†source】.

Schumer has proposed a set of principles to guide this process. He suggests that any legislation on AI should first facilitate innovation before addressing risks to national security or democratic governance. The framework also includes security, accountability, democratic foundations, and explainability. He stressed the importance of these last two pillars, as unrestricted AI could potentially undermine electoral processes or make it impossible to critically evaluate an AI’s claims【9†source】.

While Schumer was restrained in calling for specific proposals, he did express the need for companies to develop systems that allow users to understand why an AI system produced a specific answer and where that answer originated. He acknowledges that a consensus might even emerge recommending against major government intervention on the technology【10†source】.

As for the timeline, Schumer predicts that the process of developing comprehensive proposals will take several months, longer than weeks but shorter than years【11†source】.

Critique: (by ChatGPT)

The article provides an informative overview of Schumer's AI regulatory plan, emphasizing his deliberate approach and the framework he's proposed. However, the article could have included more context about the current AI landscape and why these measures are deemed necessary. It does touch upon issues like AI's potential to spread misinformation and perpetuate biases, but a deeper analysis would have been beneficial.

The article also lacks counterpoints or reactions from other stakeholders in the AI field, such as representatives from AI companies, ethicists, or other policymakers who may have differing views on AI regulation. Including these perspectives would have given a more rounded view of the issue. Schumer's approach of prioritizing innovation before addressing risks could be seen as problematic considering the pace of AI development and the potential for misuse.

Additionally, while Schumer's proposed framework and principles are mentioned, the article could have dived deeper into what these principles would mean in practice, or how they compare to existing regulatory proposals from around the world. This would have added more substance to the discussion of the Senate's regulatory plans.