Bad prompt is just an example. The issue isn’t just bad prompts. The issue is that someone across the country can do something that makes it illegal for you to use your program. It doesn’t matter exactly what it is.
Imagine that if your text editor crashed someone’s system, or just was used to create illegal text by someone, it now became illegal for you to use that text editor.
The history of computing is filled with government and company attempts to keep you from running the software you choose on your own computer. It used to be that people familiar with computers recognized this for what it was. But suddenly when it comes to AI, “you may not run your own software on your own computer” is a great thing. Remember when the government tried to make strong encryption illegal? Your proposal is basically the same thing. (“This encryption program was used to encrypt child porn by a suspect in Nebraska. We are now arresting and sentencing this encryption program, and nobody will be permitted to use it any more.” And the government will absolutely be salivating to do that.)
Also, do you know about civil forefeiture? The government sidesteps constitutional protections by claiming that they are suing the money, not the owner. Money doesn’t have Constitutional rights, so the government gets to just take it. Claiming that you’re “sentencing the program” is the same kind of dodge. Programs don’t have First Amendment rights. You are destroying the Constitution in the name of stopping AI.
I disagree. I think it’s more akin to extremely dangerous weapons. That sometimes go off even on accident.
Encryption can’t accidentally misinterpret it’s own goal, break out of its sandbox and illegally hack into production servers. We just saw that AI can, and capabilities are increasing.
The exact same excuse that you’re using, “it’s like dangerous weapons”, was used for encryption, even though you think this isn’t anything like encryption. And for encryption, it was used to deny people their rights.
Bad prompt is just an example. The issue isn’t just bad prompts. The issue is that someone across the country can do something that makes it illegal for you to use your program. It doesn’t matter exactly what it is.
Imagine that if your text editor crashed someone’s system, or just was used to create illegal text by someone, it now became illegal for you to use that text editor.
The history of computing is filled with government and company attempts to keep you from running the software you choose on your own computer. It used to be that people familiar with computers recognized this for what it was. But suddenly when it comes to AI, “you may not run your own software on your own computer” is a great thing. Remember when the government tried to make strong encryption illegal? Your proposal is basically the same thing. (“This encryption program was used to encrypt child porn by a suspect in Nebraska. We are now arresting and sentencing this encryption program, and nobody will be permitted to use it any more.” And the government will absolutely be salivating to do that.)
Also, do you know about civil forefeiture? The government sidesteps constitutional protections by claiming that they are suing the money, not the owner. Money doesn’t have Constitutional rights, so the government gets to just take it. Claiming that you’re “sentencing the program” is the same kind of dodge. Programs don’t have First Amendment rights. You are destroying the Constitution in the name of stopping AI.
I disagree. I think it’s more akin to extremely dangerous weapons. That sometimes go off even on accident.
Encryption can’t accidentally misinterpret it’s own goal, break out of its sandbox and illegally hack into production servers. We just saw that AI can, and capabilities are increasing.
Encryption fell under munitions laws (and technically still can), including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations laws. Were you not aware of this?
How is that relevant?
The exact same excuse that you’re using, “it’s like dangerous weapons”, was used for encryption, even though you think this isn’t anything like encryption. And for encryption, it was used to deny people their rights.