361
NGL, I can respect that. Probably on tax money let's be honest, but kudos for wanting to be informed.
Honestly, I'd much rather tax money go to that than to hand outs for corporations
Ya, thinking about it now, I'm on board.
I’d GLADY use my tax dollars to educate my representatives about new technology.
To be fair though, someone in that position of power should already be well educated. It should be a requirement so we don't end up with the space lasers dipshit and the handy in a theater whore. It should also be a requirement to keep up with times by doing what this guy did.
It takes more checks and balances to be a truck driver than it does to become a senator or someone in the house.
Yeah but he got free classes while the rest of us suffered. Like to know how he vote on student loan debt.
https://www.billtrack50.com/legislatordetail/20814
That's his record of votes and proposed legislation for the current Congress.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2034
That's a bill he supported in committee.
He has also worked with Sanders and Warren to convince Biden to expand debt relief granted through the executive branch. As far as congressmen go, he's a good one.
Glad to hear it. Reading article he seems to want to truly understand the billls he is voting for or against. Good to see but wish we could get fresh blood in there. Because Sanders and this guy won't live forever. On another note fuck Warren she a 🐍.
I'm ootl what'd warren do
She stabed Sanders in the back and she refused to leave the primary during Super Tuesday all because she was promised VP. She literally flushed all the work progressive tried to accomplish for her career.
No surprise since she was a former Republican even 2016 she refused to endorse Sanders over Clinton.
She not progressive she a neoliberal and wish people stop talking about her as if she on our side because she is not. She a snake in the grass. She there to seam progressive but to toe the corporate line.
His salary is also from taxes so kinda either way.
If we're going to PAY for congressmen, the least we could do is make it free for everyone else.
Scanning... Scanning.... ah, there it is: "Democrat"
Is it confirmation bias or is it just most often true that Democrats do the admirable stuff and Republicans do the abhorrent stuff?
Well yeah. The republicans who do the admirable stuff get ostracized by their colleagues and their base. Look at McCain (what they did to his legacy) or his daughter. Look at Mitt Romney. Old guard actual republicans with a shred of integrity are bullied for not chasing the outrage of the week.
Hell, even house speaker Mike Johnson, by all accounts a deep red Bible thumping Maga republican asshole, is facing resignation calls for just compromising on a bill that might avert a government shutdown. Literally doing his job.
It's not confirmation bias. Republican congressman don't have the room to understand what they're voting on.
Republicans have this Reagan-era thing called the “11th Commandment” - you fall in line with the leader, no dissent voiced in the party. So basically, party first, the needs of the nation second.
They also believe there is a fixed amount of funds available for anything, and it’s basically the Hunger Games if you want to fight for your constituency. The rich though are always supported.
Democrats have had this idea of “the Big Tent” since the FDR days; there’s room for everyone and we need to consider at everyone’s views to work together. Basically the polar opposite of Republicans - they’re all Black and White thinking, and Dems live and build in the Greys where the rest of us are. Dems are a mix of financial conservatives, centrists and progressives, and each section does it part to pull the party forward, together.
We’re also quick to beat up on one of our own if they’re taking graft - hello, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey. Can you imagine the Republicans doing this? No, I didn’t think so.
Overall yes, but do note that the person in charge of the committee is a Republican and also seems keen on understanding what they regulate.
good for this guy for trying to learn more about the stuff he’s regulating. although i can’t help but feel concerned that “congressman wants to understand the things he’s regulating” is a headline news story. shouldn’t this be the bare minimum?
They used to have an office dedicated to this stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment
Hey would you look at that.."It was defunded at the end of 1995, following the 1994 mid-term elections which led to Republican control of the Senate and the House. House Republican legislators characterized the OTA as wasteful and hostile to GOP interests."
IIRC that was spearheaded by Newt Gingrich, the OG way too fucking old congressman
he was a lot more than just too old. evil genius, really. piece of shit but he spearheded so much of what seems normal now
The whole of Congress (more or less) votes on everything they regulate. There are lots of different subjects in the world, although AI is definitely one of the newer ones. Being a congressman is a pretty busy job juggling time between home and Washington (plus a campaign every 2 years to keep your job). I'm really impressed he was able to squeeze this in, let alone anything else Congress may have to regulate
It sucks, but I'm not seeing a practical way to make this a common thing.
I wish more politicians would do this, and not rely on corporate lobbyist to educate them or write laws for them.
Yup. This is my guy, my VA rep. I remember getting either a mailer, or a newsletter, or whatever, update from his office talking about him starting this. Thought it was great and locked in my support. I agree we need to keep flowing in young blood into congress, but Don is still doing good work and doing his best to keep relevant.
Honestly, a solid half of the reason I want young people in Congress is that they're (in theory) still willing to learn, so I'm fairly ok with this guy if he's willing to put in the work.
The other half is because they'll have to live with the consequences for longer, so let's still get the average age in politics down, but yeah. I like hearing about this guy.
I’d take a Don Beyer over any young Republican lackey any day (hello, Moscow Marge).
Fuck age - I want a thinking person with real experience, who makes an effort to do what’s right for all of us.
This is the kind of thing I'd like to see a lot more of.
Lobby groups in the US cant be trusted to offer sensible regulation of themselves and congress doesn't know the industry so they cant be trusted for sensible regulations either.
Id be far more willing to trust the US Congress if they knew at least a little about the things they are trying to regulate
I thought it was going to be a cringe inducing fluff piece but the guy showed a decent grasp of the benefits and pitfalls of expanded AI use as well as why the EU's approach is not the way we probably want to go. Pleasantly surprised.
why the EU's approach is not the way we probably want to go.
Is that part in a different article? I'd like to read more on that, but this article didn't seem to go into it that much
It was mentioned in the video interview. I don't know of a single article with a good summary.
What's wrong with how the EU is doing it? Seems pretty level headed to me.
Unfortunately, the press releases are PR fluff. The EU's publicity guys don't work any differently than those of any major corporations.
I know parts of the AI act and may be able to answer questions about particular aspects.
Off the top of my head: 3 general problems.
It is simply a mistake to regulate software based on how it is made, rather than what it is used for. EG They ended up regulating chatbots in the same act as mass surveillance. I don't think that helped, either. Hard to say for sure.
They ended up doing a lot of bad micromanaging. The training data for "high risk" AI must fulfill certain conditions. This is certainly going to increase costs, but it's unclear if it will lead to any improvement. The sane thing would have been to define the desired performance. It's a typical problem. People without technical knowledge demand things to be done a certain way, because they figure it will get them what they want, instead of saying what they want.
Finally, there's the interference of existing industry. The copyright lobby got some stuff in there, that may or may not enable them to extract some free money. It will certainly harm European citizens by making development much harder than it needs to be.
This actually made me tear up a bit, knowing there is someone in congress willing to make the effort to properly educate himself on the stuff he's writing and passing laws governing.
Man, he went straight towards a Masters Degree. That’s not some BS publicity move. Have to give the guy a lot of respect.
A USA leader acting responsibly? This is unheard of. Good for this guy.
His name is Don Beyer, since nobody's mentioned it yet. Seems like an upstanding dude!
Well, anyone willing to admit they don't know something, then take steps to rectify that lack of knowledge.... Well they are ok in my book
Reminds me of the judge on the SCO Linux case that took a programming class to better understand the arguments in the case.
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
361 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19144 readers
1716 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS