Google challenges OpenAI’s calls for government A.I. czar

A new filing has revealed that Google and OpenAI, two US companies in the field of artificial intelligence, have opposing ideas about how the technology should be regulated by the government.

Google On Monday, he provided commentary in response to a National Telecommunications and Information Administration request on how to consider accountability for artificial intelligence at a time when technology is advancing rapidly, Washington Post first reported. Google is one of the leading developers of generative AI with chatbot Bard, along with MicrosoftSupports OpenAI with its ChatGPT client.

While OpenAI CEO Sam Altman promoted the idea of ​​a new AI-focused government agency to handle its complexities and license the technology, Google said in its filing that it favors a “layered, multi-stakeholder approach to AI governance.”

Google writes: “Nationally, we support a hub-and-talk approach — with a central agency such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reporting to sector regulators who oversee AI implementation — rather than ‘managing AI’ in its dossier.” Unique issues in financial services, healthcare, and other regulated industries and issue areas that would benefit from the expertise of experienced regulators in those sectors — and which work better than a new regulatory agency that issues and enforces raw rules that are not as adaptable to the diverse contexts in which AI is deployed “.

Others in AI, including researchers, have expressed similar views, saying that government regulation of AI might be a better way to protect marginalized communities — despite OpenAI’s argument that the technology is advancing too quickly for such an approach.

“The problem I see with the FDA’s ‘AI’ regulation model is that it assumes that AI needs to be regulated separately from other things,” Emily M. Bender, professor and director of the University of Washington’s Computational Linguistics Laboratory, to publish on Twitter. “I completely agree that so-called ‘AI’ systems should not be deployed without some sort of certification process first. But that process should depend on the purpose of the system… Existing regulators should maintain their jurisdiction.”

This contrasts with OpenAI and Microsoft’s preference for a more centralized organizational model. Microsoft President Brad Smith has He said It supports a new government agency to regulate AI, and OpenAI’s founders, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and Ilya Sutskever, have publicly expressed their vision of regulating AI in similar ways to nuclear power, under a global AI regulatory body akin to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

OpenAI execs wrote in a blog post that “any effort beyond a certain threshold (or resources such as computing) must be subject to an international authority that can inspect systems, require audits, test compliance with safety standards (and) restrictions on degrees of spread and levels of security.”

in interview With the Post, Google’s head of global affairs, Kent Walker, said he was “not opposed” to the idea of ​​a new regulator to oversee the licensing of large language models, but said the government should look “more holistically” at the technology. He said the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is already well positioned to take the lead.

Google and Microsoft’s seemingly contradictory views on regulation point to a growing debate in the AI ​​field, one that goes far beyond how much regulation should be regulated and how regulatory logistics work.

“There is a question about whether or not there should be a new AI agency?” Helen Toner, director of the Georgetown Center on Security and Emerging Technology, told CNBC, “Should you take this up with the existing regulatory authorities working in specific sectors, or should there be something central to all types of AI?”

Microsoft and OpenAI did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comment.

WATCH: Microsoft has unleashed another wave of AI features as the race heats up with Google