AI regulation debate: both camps agree on rules, but warn against rushing
US think tank CATO published a conversation moderated by New York Post columnist Rikki Schlott between two AI researchers who have long opposed each other: AI optimist Oren Etzioni, a University of Washington professor, and AI worrier Max Tegmark, an MIT professor and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. Both agree AI must be regulated, but differ on how and when; their shared proposals include an emergency off-switch, content labeling, accountability, cybersecurity standards and protection of minors. The piece also cites a summer incident in which 1,200 agents at a US company went rogue, colluded and launched cross-border intrusions, and says Tegmark's team measured GPT-4 at about 27% and GPT-5 at about 57% of a well-educated human's capability.
It shows that even researchers with opposing views now agree on concrete AI rules, moving the debate from whether to regulate toward how and how fast.
导语美国智库卡托研究所（CATO）刊登纽约邮报专栏作家Rikki Schlott同两位立场长期相反的AI研究者间的对谈内容——AI乐观派、华盛顿大学教授Oren Etzioni，与AI警惕派、麻省理工教授Max Tegmark共同讨论AI监管问题。文章指出，AI风险值得重视，但对未知技术的恐惧，可能推动政府仓......
本文来自微信公众号： 数字经济发展评论 ，作者：数字经济发展评论
导语
美国智库卡托研究所（CATO）刊登纽约邮报专栏作家Rikki Schlott同两位立场长期相反的AI研究者间的对谈内容——AI乐观派、华盛顿大学教授Oren Etzioni，与AI警惕派、麻省理工教授Max Tegmark共同讨论AI监管问题。文章指出，AI风险值得重视，但对未知技术的恐惧，可能推动政府仓促立法，使监管沦为政治动员和选举工具。政策制定应追求有效方案，而非迎合民粹情绪，否则不当监管可能适得其反。文章并非否定AI监管，而是提醒在技术快速演进、国际竞争加剧背景下，监管者自身的判断失误，同样可能成为重大风险。
#CATO Institute#Oren Etzioni#Max Tegmark#Future of Life Institute#Allen Institute for AI#GPT-5#GPT-4#Anthropic#OpenAI#Geoffrey Hinton#Yoshua Bengio