Regulating AI Without Stifling Innovation with Jamil Jaffer

People talk a lot about AI as an existential threat.

And when you talk to people who spend a lot of time in this space, they discuss the potential abundance, scientific breakthrough, quality of life improvements, things of that nature.

And it seems like there are sort of two camps, the Armageddon annihilation of humanity and And then there's the sort of perfect utopia scenario.

It doesn't seem to be a lot in the middle at this point.

And I feel like the Europeans are more in the it's an existential threat.

They're also smaller countries.

Quite frankly, there is a lot of regulation.

And I think they have trouble competing with talent because let's face it, our companies can pay.

Yeah.

Now, look, it doesn't mean that we don't need trust, safety, and security baked into our AI models and the applications that come on top of them.

To the contrary, if you're going to get real adoption, right, of this technology, I mean, we're not seeing the adoption rates we need to see for this to really be transformative for our society and others.

There's a tremendous amount of innovation taking place.

But for it to work effectively, people have to adopt at significant levels.

And you're not going to see that until people feel like their data is going to be able to go in.

It'll be protected that they won't get answers that are incorrect and that they can rely on their privacy to be protected and their data to be safe and their intellectual property protected.

And right now today, that's not how people feel around a lot of the AI developments.

And so as a result, what you're going to see is the market is going to push companies And you're already seeing it, right? It was actually why Anthropic was created.

The people who created Anthropic left OpenAI to create what they saw as a more safety conscious, a more carefully put together system.

Now, that may not be true today, or maybe that they've changed their views on things, or maybe they're implementing that in a way that people think is different.

But we've even seen departures from Other departments were open AI with Ilya Suskova leaving.

He started his own company where he says he's going to create a more trusted AI capability as well.

So you're seeing the market already create this movement for trusted, safe, and secure AI.

And so the real question is, do we need whatever the 535 old people in Congress to be setting the rules around this? As if the laws and regulations can actually keep up with the rate of technology, that would be crazy.

If they could, the technology is moving so fast.

The reality is laws and regulations... just can't keep up, they'll always be behind.

People talk a lot about AI as an existential threat.

And when you talk to people who spend a lot of time in this space, they discuss the potential abundance, scientific breakthrough, quality of life improvements, things of that nature.

And it seems like there are sort of two camps, the Armageddon annihilation of humanity and And then there's the sort of perfect utopia scenario.

It doesn't seem to be a lot in the middle at this point.

And I feel like the Europeans are more in the it's an existential threat.

They're also smaller countries.

Quite frankly, there is a lot of regulation.

And I think they have trouble competing with talent because let's face it, our companies can pay.

Yeah.

Now, look, it doesn't mean that we don't need trust, safety, and security baked into our AI models and the applications that come on top of them.

To the contrary, if you're going to get real adoption, right, of this technology, I mean, we're not seeing the adoption rates we need to see for this to really be transformative for our society and others.

There's a tremendous amount of innovation taking place.

But for it to work effectively, people have to adopt at significant levels.

And you're not going to see that until people feel like their data is going to be able to go in.

It'll be protected that they won't get answers that are incorrect and that they can rely on their privacy to be protected and their data to be safe and their intellectual property protected.

And right now today, that's not how people feel around a lot of the AI developments.

And so as a result, what you're going to see is the market is going to push companies And you're already seeing it, right? It was actually why Anthropic was created.

The people who created Anthropic left OpenAI to create what they saw as a more safety conscious, a more carefully put together system.

Now, that may not be true today, or maybe that they've changed their views on things, or maybe they're implementing that in a way that people think is different.

But we've even seen departures from Other departments were open AI with Ilya Suskova leaving.

He started his own company where he says he's going to create a more trusted AI capability as well.

So you're seeing the market already create this movement for trusted, safe, and secure AI.

And so the real question is, do we need whatever the 535 old people in Congress to be setting the rules around this? As if the laws and regulations can actually keep up with the rate of technology, that would be crazy.

If they could, the technology is moving so fast.

The reality is laws and regulations... just can't keep up, they'll always be behind.