As with so much modern political theatre, the debate on artificial intelligence has become polarised to a point that is often profoundly unhelpful, with a false dichotomy between ‘doomers’ and utopians who see AI as a solution to the world’s many problems, both technical and social.
Between those positions is a world of nuance and wildly varying predictions on what this expanding new technology could mean. All the while commentators and politicians talk about ‘AI policy’ as if it were a single thing, rather than a whole suite of overlapping issues: they range from the banal – discriminatory algorithms and deepfake of politicians, say – to the unnerving prospect of AI reaching a human-like level of intelligence. As one of our guests in this week’s episode puts it, at this stage talking about ‘AI policy’ is about as useful as talking about ‘electricity policy’.
To hammer out some of those questions we brought together Connor Axiotes, the Lead on Risk Policy at the Adam Smith Institute, and our own Head of Tech from the Centre for Policy Studies, Matthew Feeney.
.
.
Click here to subscribe to our daily briefing – the best pieces from CapX and across the web.
CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.
