Step over those puddles

UAPs, Embryos, and AI rights

Author

Christian Duvall
September 08, 2023

That last one took a lot out of us, but we didn’t forget about you.

We always love hearing your comments – [email protected].

Here’s what we got for you:

  • Declassified UAP Details

  • Making more humans, the new-fashioned way

  • AI – A threat to democracy

  • Links and whatnot

Declassified UAP Details

The Pentagon has a brand new website for sharing declassified UAP information and I am absolutely here for it.

The section called “Official UAP Videos” is where you’ll find some videos with explanations by AARO, however, not all are addressed.

Whether or not you believe in aliens per se, the idea that we have hard-to-explain videos of objects demonstrating properties beyond our current understanding of physics is really cool.

The fact that it’s becoming a public discussion is exciting – although it leaves a lot of open questions around why (and why now). In America, we don’t take too kindly to matters of “public and national security” being discussed openly, so this topic being so open lately feels a bit…sus.

Making humans the new-fashioned way

Scientists have announced that they’ve grown an embryo to 14 days based on stem cells and nothing more. No wining, no dining, and absolutely no gametes.

While most of society is sitting around worrying about AI taking away its financial well-being, science is like “hold my beer” as it fulfills its new mission of making sex obsolete.

This has remarkable implications for those who are struggling to conceive; with fertility rates dropping at a rate of 1.1% per year, this sort of technology could prove critical for the continuation of the human race.

On the flip side of that, fertility procedures are often insanely expensive, which could lead to only people of means being able to procreate.

This raises a tremendous number of moral, social, and political questions – and this is a snarky tech blog, sooooo here’s an awkward picture I made with AI.

AI – A Threat to Democracy

The White House’s Office of Science and Technology posted an evergreen article last year called the “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights”, which highlights the perceived risks to the American public posed by the advancement of AI and its recommendations for addressing them.

I was actually very excited to read this. After all, AI is changing the way tech interacts with the world, and knowing how our government sees the situation could definitely affect how we build.

Among the great challenges posed to democracy today is the use of technology, data, and automated systems in ways that threaten the rights of the American public. Too often, these tools are used to limit our opportunities and prevent our access to critical resources or services.

Shame on me for being surprised.

It was really a whole lot of nothing, wrapped up in a tidy package that serves to remind us how the Overton Window has shifted so obscenely that all we have left are heroes and villains.

Anyway…this “blueprint” is not about AI.

  • The entire piece is scaremongering about the risks of technology, which have been present for decades

  • The phrase “artificial intelligence” appears only once in the entire thing

  • The title actually sounds like it’s suggesting rights for the AI, which would be probably more fun

What is it then? It reads like a 101 on general software practices that justifies its own existence with scary phrases like:

"Threats to our democracy"

"Inequality"

"Data Privacy"

I was actually surprised at how little they did to hide the fact that AI was just a catchy way to get people to read it. Even the scoping statement is vague:

Thus, this framework uses a two-part test to determine what systems are in scope. This framework applies to (1) automated systems that (2) have the potential to meaningfully impact the American public’s rights, opportunities, or access to critical resources or services.

So this guidance apparently applies to any system, not just one with an AI component, that falls into this very loosely defined set of rules. From recruiting software to LinkedIn. All of HealthTech.

Basically, any legislation created against this recommendation would impact the majority of public-facing software systems – and possibly at a devastating cost. The major call out here is the requirement to have a “human alternative” that is “accessible, equitable, effective, maintained, accompanied by appropriate operator training, and should not impose an unreasonable burden on the public”

This is just simply not possible in many cases and true AI solutions are often irreplicable by human beings.

Lawmakers do not have a history of rational decision-making when it comes to technology, so this is a real and valid risk.

Plus, could you imagine the implications of submitting your resume to a job posting today and “opting out” of automated screening? If you have a child in high school today who is thinking about college, pushing them toward tech law might be the safest way to secure their future.

Sponsor

This issue is brought to you by Rainwell Consulting.

A lot of founders struggle with the same questions.

  • How do I de-risk executive hires?

  • How do we get from MVP to a scalable, effective product?

  • Is our current technology holding us back?

  • How do we leverage AI to create the best solution for our customers?

  • What type of technical organization is best for us?

At Rainwell Consulting, we help companies gain the confidence to know their tech is heading in the right direction, so they can focus on solving the big problems.

If you’d like to sponsor future issues: [email protected]