A us presidential candidate, before the elections next November (poling at least 1% at the time) says something for public consumption that's quoted, filmed, taped, or otherwise publicly knowable afterwards to the effect of them having an intention to bring their authority to bear if they can to address some kind of near term AI risk.
Naive understandings particular risks or of how difficult it might be to take action do not disqualify. For example the following would resolve true: "my administration would be prepared to act immediately if we got wind of one of those things being involved in starting a war" or "if those things start messing with the stock market, I think we'll have to step in right away", or "any word of those things telling people how to make new viruses and we're going in and pulling the plug", etc.
Vague language including other branches of government or discouraging without a claim about decisive use of presidential power will not resolve positive, such as "we should have a referendum if it's going to affect us", "it's moving too fast", "we're going to have to regulate it", "more safety should be required", "congress needs to act", etc.
Related questions
It's encouraging to see presidential candidates addressing the importance of proactive measures concerning AI risks. Addressing near-term AI concerns demonstrates foresight and commitment to safeguarding society's interests. If anyone interested in analyse factors that influence the capacity of an individual to express consent you can read it.
As a student, I find it reassuring that a serious US presidential candidate acknowledges the urgency of addressing near-term AI risks. Their commitment to decisive action reflects the growing awareness of AI's potential impacts. This stance resonates with my concerns and underscores the need for proactive measures. Now, time to do my assignment.
The candidate might propose or support the development of regulations and oversight mechanisms to ensure responsible AI development. This could include guidelines for ethical AI practices, transparency, and accountability.I offer an online the best Phd Thesis Pakistan to help the students at a cheap rate.
“My Administration places the highest urgency on governing the development and use of AI safely and responsibly, and is therefore advancing a coordinated, Federal Government-wide approach to doing so. The rapid speed at which AI capabilities are advancing compels the United States to lead in this moment for the sake of our security, economy, and society.“
This seems to meet the criteria
@BenAdams This is very vague. It's not clear to me that there is a claim here that they will address a near term risk, or perceive there to be one coming that would be worth addressing. Reads more like someone wanting the public to feel like the administration cares about the state of AI development generally because of it's perceived relevance to future geopolitics.