The comparison between artificial intelligence (AI) and nuclear weapons is a popular one, but the US approach to regulating bioweapons and biotechnology may be more appropriate for AI. AI has been described as “the most powerful weapon ever created” due to its potential impact on society. However, unlike nuclear bombs, which have an immediate destructive effect on their surroundings, the effects of AI are much less tangible and can take years or even decades before they become apparent.
In contrast to the regulation of nuclear weapons—which focuses heavily on limiting access through treaties—bioweapon regulations focus more closely on controlling research activities to prevent dangerous technologies from being developed or misused. This type of regulation could also be applied effectively to AI development: governments could require companies working with advanced algorithms and machine learning techniques to adhere to strictly regulated standards that limit how these technologies can be used so they do not cause harm over time.
Furthermore, while many countries have adopted international agreements regarding nuclear weapons control such as The Treaty On The Non-Proliferation Of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), there is currently no equivalent agreement governing the global use of artificial intelligence technology; however, this kind of treaty would likely need a different approach than those used for other forms of weaponry given the unique nature of this technology. Ultimately, it’s clear that treating artificial intelligence like a biological weapon rather than a traditional military one offers better protection against misuse or abuse by ensuring careful oversight throughout its development process.
Read more at Gizmodo
