What Might We Lose in a State-Level Approach to AI? A New Report Weighs the Risks
A new policy analysis out today for the Cato Institute by Joshua Levine, a research fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation, examines the opportunity cost of state and local artificial intelligence (AI) policy.
lead
,
Proposals to regulate AI at the state level continue to increase, but at what cost to innovation-promoting actions or this particular technology? The author argues that “State and local governments should prioritize learning about where AI-powered systems can work to address pressing problems that challenge their citizens, where the technology is most likely to be disruptive, and where they, as government officials, have a comparative advantage on regulation.”
Levine states that while people are reasonably concerned about the future of AI, “these anxieties should not obstruct advances in human welfare. Impulsive AI regulation can have enormous opportunity costs. These regulations may feel reassuring today, but they may obstruct a life-saving therapeutic, or an early-warning detection for a natural disaster, or a new profession that provides fulfillment and livelihoods for other people.”
Levine also highlights the steps states may already be taking that have impacts on the ways they attract or dissuade innovation and entrepreneurship in this area, including energy, tax, and personal liability policy.
In addition to this analysis, Levine will be participating in a discussion with Jennifer Huddleston, a senior fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute, along with Matt Mittelsteadt, a research fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute, and Tatiana Rice with the Future of Privacy Forum, on Thursday, June 12. You can register for the event here.
If you would like to speak with Huddleston, Mittelsteadt or Levine, please reach out to mmiller@cato.org.
