David Sacks, an adviser to President Trump on technology, says fears that AI could threaten humanity are overblown during an interview with CBS’s Jo Ling Kent. Sacks responds to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI founder Sam Altman that if they really believe AI is dangerous, it is their responsibility to slow down. “Why are you acting like this is something that you can’t control? If you can’t control it, then don’t do it, would be my view, or step aside for people who can,” he said. “You have a responsibility as a leader of this company to make sure that your products are safe. You have massive product liability.” “By any definition, they are a duopoly,” he said. “So when Dario and Sam come out and say we’ve got to pace the frontier, it’s like: Guys, go ahead. You are the frontier. You can just do it.” “You don’t need some special benefits from the government to do this. If this is your corporate and social responsibility, you should just go ahead and do it.”

CBS: People are feeling kind of scared right now about what AI could do to humanity. You’ve got whistleblowers, the heads of these big AI companies all speaking out. Do you agree with their prediction? DAVID SACKS: If the prediction is that AI is going to end humanity, I think that’s overly dramatic, and I don’t personally subscribe to that. I think this is becoming a panic. We’re in an election season, and there is an incentive for political actors to try and amplify the fear. And I think this is a moment to really calm down a little bit and look at the issue rationally. I think that AI safety is an issue, as the leaders of these labs have said, but it’s something that I think we can address, and it’s something that these labs themselves have to get right. CBS: Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, has said that he agrees with what one of the whistleblowers has to say, that this could all be over. I mean, do you not – these are pretty smart guys at these companies who know this technology saying this stuff too? DAVID SACKS: Well, to me, that’s a little bit of a contradiction when I hear something like that. You have the leader of a frontier AI lab say that frontier AI is dangerous, so dangerous that it can end humanity. I guess my question when I hear something like that is: Why are you doing it? I mean, you’re the leader of this company. Why are you acting like this is something that you can’t control? If you can’t control it, then don’t do it, would be my view, or step aside for people who can. You have a responsibility as a leader of this company to make sure that your products are safe. You have massive product liability. … CBS: You have said, in a post in reaction to Dario Amodei’s essay, that all of these individuals coming out together, or these big companies coming out to ask for regulation, is potentially a way for them to eliminate the competition and to make it harder for competitors to get into the race. Do you still think that? SACKS: I think there is a well-known phenomenon known as regulatory capture, where this has happened throughout business history and is very well documented, where companies will go to the government to seek regulation and try to bend the regulations to their advantage. I do think that is a concern here, where you have these companies that are very well-funded, very well-established, that are on the brink of having a multi-trillion-dollar IPO, go to the government in order to get regulations that benefit them. We need to make sure that doesn’t happen. I’m not saying that I’m against all regulations, but I am against regulatory capture. Let me give you an example. In his essay, Dario says that he needs antitrust waivers in order to pursue this AI safety agenda. I don’t think that’s true. I don’t think he needs – what he’s saying when he says, “I need an antitrust waiver,” is, “I should be able to form a cartel,” or, “I should be protected from competition.” In my view, that’s not acceptable. You don’t get to be protected from competition. I think that’s part of their motivation. A big part. … One of the things that Dario is saying is that we need to pace the frontier. Slow it down. But here’s the thing that I find curious about this: He is the frontier. He and Sam are the frontier. When you talk about frontier AI, we basically have a duopoly in this country right now. It is Anthropic and OpenAI. CBS: Do you think they’re trying to protect that by asking for regulation? SACKS: The first thing to recognize is they have duopoly market share. You look at their growth, you look at the model capabilities, you look at the revenue – by any definition, they are a duopoly. So when Dario and Sam come out and say, “Well, we’ve got to pace the frontier,” it’s like, “Guys, go ahead. You are the frontier. You can just do this.” That’s what I’m saying, is you don’t need some special benefits from the government to do this. This is your corporate and social responsibility, so you should just go ahead and do it. … CBS: You’re one of Trump’s top advisers on AI, and the president just posted that AI taking over the world, destroying humanity, is a hoax. Do you agree with him? SACKS: I think we are in a political season right now, and again, it feels like a panic is being ginned up. I think we’ve lived through different panics in the past, and so I do think that the threat here has been exaggerated and whipped up. One of the things I think is very misleading about what’s happened is you have these folks who call themselves researchers. They say they work in a lab. I mean, basically they’re employees of a corporation. But when they give these numbers, like they say, “Well, this could be a greater than 10% chance of extinction,” it makes it sound like they’re making scientific predictions. These are not scientific predictions. These are just some people’s opinion about the future. Not the present, but this is basically just their view of what could happen in the future. There is no evidence or facts to support that. This is their view. CBS: Does President Trump have information that we don’t have? Does he know something we don’t know to be able to say, “Okay, this is all a hoax,” as he puts it? DAVID SACKS: The hoax is that somehow we’re going to be extinct as a species within a few years because of AI, and therefore we have to stop completely. Look at what Bernie Sanders is proposing right now: a new bill that would basically pause all development, hand our lead in the AI race to China. There’s no evidence to do something like that, and it’d be foolish. There are risks and there are benefits. We have to manage the risks.

RealClearPolitics Videos