The Case for a Pro-AI-Safety Political Party in the US
Introduction: Artificial Intelligence is advancing rapidly, raising significant concerns about its safe development and deployment. Despite widespread public concern about AI, there is a notable absence of a sustained political movement dedicated to addressing these issues. While certain organizations and individuals are engaged in shaping AI policy, these efforts have generally avoided the domain of electoral politics. This post argues for the establishment of a centrist political party that is firmly committed to promoting AI safety. The argument rests on three main claims: 1. Comprehensive U.S. government support for AI safety would substantially increase the likelihood that advanced AI systems are developed and deployed responsibly. 2. Current government action on AI safety remains limited, leaving considerable scope for additional policy initiatives. 3. A pro-AI-Safety party could represent a comparatively cost-effective mechanism for advancing these goals and has a reasonable probability of substantially influencing governmental action on AI. The Importance of Increased Governmental Support for AI Safety: Governments are needed to promote AI safety because the current dynamics of free-market AI development make voluntary caution difficult, and because AI carries unprecedented risk and transformative potential. Furthermore, the US government can make a huge difference for a relatively insignificant slice of its budget. The Highly Competitive Nature of AI and The Pitfalls of Self-Regulation: While self-regulation should be an important component of AI Safety, there are many reasons to believe it might not be sufficient for ensuring AI is developed safely. Firstly, there’s potentially a massive first-mover advantage in AI. The first group to develop an AI system which dramatically increases the productivity of ML research could theoretically secure overwhelming economic power by utilizing said AI to kick off a chain of recursive self improvement. This c
Thanks for stating your objection to my argument. I agree with you and that is why I argue for the formation of a centrist party with AI Safety as an important issue, rather than a party which literally only speaks about AI, as the latter party would come across as unserious (even the Green Party does not do this with climate change). You can see the "What about other issues?" section about some general positions I think a party should take.
I also think an effective political party could grow support for AI Safety by leveraging media coverage in order to bring to light the dangers of AI and the necessity of regulation,... (read more)