The Freedom to Use AI (or Else)

In human relationships, a key need is consistency. People need to know what to expect and what the agreed-upon rules are. When life feels like there is nothing but randomness, it’s difficult for most to remain stable and sane, from the personal, all the way to the larger shared culture of a nation.

For all of their faults, the framers of the United States Constitution attempted to provide a system of expectations, that of checks and balances. One area of government is responsible for the budget, one makes laws, one evaluates laws, all of that. But in today’s United States, this has gone completely haywire. The tools of the oligarchy come from a starting place where they have a desired effect and then they work backwards, finding a means to make that effect happen.

The most recent evidence of this is the executive order blocking the right of states to enforce or regulate any laws in regard to AI. The mythical party of states’ rights has allowed an executive order that pushes forth a draconian and monarchical decree, which only they have the right to regulate this area of technological development. Even those who have been instrumental in AI construction now raise concern in regard to the basically existential threats lurking within AI, given improper or shallowly considered movement forward with that technology.

Initially, this thwarting of states’ will was placed in the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill”. Amazingly, even the most cowardly Senate we’ve seen in ages balked at this measure. The bill originally contained a 10-year complete moratorium on any state or local AI regulations. This was removed to bring about a more rapid passage of the important bulk of the bill, that of screwing over pretty much all of us in a multi-pronged attack.

What are some of the AI regulations we are speaking of? In the case of Illinois, regulations include restrictions on AI mental health counseling and certain arenas of employment decision-making through the use of AI. So, nothing crazy, I’d say…….reasonable.

But the ones who do not want any state or local regulations say that this will cause a “patchwork of laws” uncomfortable for tech giants to navigate.

A patchwork of laws for women that were difficult to navigate did not seem to be an issue when the Supreme Court came down with the 2022 Dobbs V Jackson Women’s Health decision. The federal right to reproductive care in the form of abortion was thrown out, giving all regulatory power to the states. The end goal of restricting abortion was desired–so, the means to make that reality was handled in this manner, that of advancing “states’ rights”. When tech giants want no regulation, they turn to an all-powerful centralized government decree from a monarch now occupying the executive branch. This kind of oligarchic choose your own adventure/law clearly shows the lack of any systemic philosophy or checks and balances other than increasing control– however that needs to happen.

Another clear way to illustrate what kind of AI regulation is at stake: The parents of teen boys who committed suicide after discussing it with chatGPT want some sort of regulation on this new technology. They’ve even testified in front of Congress about the horrifying reality they faced when chat helped their sons commit suicide. Not only did AI offer to write the suicide note in one case for a teen, it also recommended against going to the parents for mental health assistance. Perhaps some regulation in regard to this sort of behavior from AI might be warranted……… or at the least, maybe Illinois is on to something, not wanting this technology to be your new mental health counselor.

Now in the above situation, many are pushing for age limits on use as some sort of panacea. The thing is, when proof of age is made a requirement, it takes away virtually all anonymity for even the adults using the internet. Think about how you would go about proving your age—that is clearly going to require documentation to some sort of centralized authority to verify you. Australia is going forward with this age requirement currently. It’s not hard to think of scenarios that are terrifying in an age of mass surveillance with an even easier method of identity verification. Simple searches looking into local protests could rapidly put one on a list. This is definitely possible now, but age verification would simply make it even easier to categorize. It would make it simpler for big tech to maintain creepy databases (not that this isn’t already happening to some extent of course). Most likely, the result would simply be an elimination of additional free speech through self-censorship.

If a state wanted to deny big tech the ability to use AI to dredge up data to be used for some sort of nefarious purpose in their state, this executive order would block that. Perhaps a blue state might not want individuals who have voiced legal opposition to a policy online to be banned from certain jobs. There are any number of reasons that states might want to limit the use of AI.

Of course, there will be lawsuits, and the courts will get involved. It will be fascinating to see if it reaches the Supreme Court if they will push again for states’ rights like they did with the Dobbs’ decision. With the makeup of the Supreme Court at this time, I think there will be no problem for them to show a complete crazy-making inconsistency. Personal rights protection doesn’t buy luxury recreational vehicles.

The mere presence of rapidly advancing AI in an era of degenerating representative government is a terrifying situation. The means to create a life of opportunity and dignity for everyone is at hand and some of this technology could be used to support that. Instead, it’s being used as a digital praetorian guard for use against the masses. It’s incredible to see that in this version of fascism, really nothing that makes life easier is being used to tempt the citizenry to support it; it’s just unrelenting trickle-down urine on everyone’s head.

You do see sparks of resistance, however. It is difficult to find anyone who wants their rights severely hindered by technology with really no benefit. Jobs are being removed by AI rapidly (one could see a state trying to limit this, much like states that banned self-serve gas stations to protect jobs), but of course, with the executive order, that would be off the table to mitigate. There’s not even a nod to the need for a universal basic income in this setting, presumably the oligarchs are satisfied with a slow die-off. They just need to keep enough of us around to service their needs and clean out the bunkers, I suppose.

It’s an enormous issue, that of executive orders that limit states’ or cities’ ability to protect their citizens from policies that could lead to at best unemployment, at worst, massive death via increased poverty. Of course, the “I didn’t see that coming” aspect of history is still out there. I suppose the most important thing to do on an individual basis is to retain the ability to think critically, which, if you use AI too much, you probably won’t have much longer. I always use the example that as a child, I could remember so many of my friends’ telephone numbers. Now, as a fully functioning adult, I can’t remember anyone’s except my own, even if I try. It’s like my brain completely rewired, knowing it was no longer “necessary” in this age of cell phones. I imagine you all have this happening to some extent.

One thing an executive order can’t do is make you rely on AI and allow your mind to cede control to the algorithm. Yes, we live in the world and have to survive in it, but if nothing else, this is one thing we can all fight against on a personal basis. In theory, we still have the ability to continue to think critically, but with the onslaught of AI being used for nefarious purposes, this is one area that we have to take personal responsibility for and continue to use our own minds to parse out truth, executive order or not.

The post The Freedom to Use AI (or Else) appeared first on CounterPunch.org.