With help from Derek Robertson and Sam Sutton
Sneha Revanur speaking in 2022. | Getty Images for Unfinished Live
Parents just dont understand the risks of generative artificial intelligence. At least according to a group of Zoomers grappling with this new force that their elders are struggling to regulate.
While young people often bear the brunt of new technologies, and must live with their long-term consequences, no youth movement has emerged around tech regulation that matches the scope or power of youth climate and gun control activism.
Thats starting to change, though, especially as concerns about AI mount.
Earlier today, a consortium of 10 youth organizations sent a letter to congressional leaders and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy calling on them to include more young people on AI oversight and advisory boards.
The letter, provided first to DFD, was spearheaded by Sneha Revanur, a first-year student at Williams College in Massachusetts and the founder of Encode Justice, an AI-focused civil society group. As a charismatic teenager who is not shy about condemning a generation of policymakers who are out of touch, as she put it in an interview, shes the closest thing the emerging movement to rein in AI has to its own Greta Thunberg. Thunberg began her rise as a global icon of the climate movement in 2018, at the age of 15, with weekly solo protests outside of Swedens parliament.
A native of San Jose in the heart of Silicon Valley, Revanur also got her start in tech advocacy as a 15-year-old. In 2020, she volunteered for the successful campaign to defeat Californias Proposition 25, which would have enshrined the replacement of cash bail with a risk-based algorithmic system.
Encode Justice emerged from that ballot campaign with a focus on the use of AI algorithms in surveillance and the criminal justice system. It currently boasts a membership of 600 high school and college students across 30 countries. Revanur said the groups primary source of funding currently comes from the Omidyar Network, a self-described social change venture led by left-leaning eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.
Revanur has become increasingly preoccupied with generative AI as it sends ripples through societies across the world. The aha moment came when she read that February New York Times article about a seductive, conniving AI chatbot. In recent weeks, concerns have only grown about the potential for generative AI to deceive and manipulate people, as well as the broader risks posed by the potential development of artificial general intelligence.
We were somewhat skeptical about the risks of generative AI, Revanur says. We see this open letter as a marking point that were pivoting.
The letter is borne in part out of concerns that older policymakers are ill-prepared to handle this rapidly developing technology. Revanur said that when she meets with congressional offices, she is struck by the lack of tech-specific expertise. Were almost always speaking to a judiciary staffer or a commerce staffer. State legislatures, she said, tend to be worse.
One sign of the generational tension at play: Todays letter calls on policymakers to improve technical literacy in government.
The letter comes at a time when the fragmented youth tech movement is starting to coalesce, according to Zamaan Qureshi, co-chair of Design It For Us Coalition, a signatory of the AI letter.
The groups that are out there have been working in a disjointed way, Qureshi, a junior at American University in Washington, said. The coalition grew out of a successful campaign last year in support of the California Age Appropriate Design Code, a state law governing online privacy for children.
To improve coordination on tech safety issues, Qureshi and a group of fellow activists launched the Design It For Us Coalition at the end of March with a kickoff call featuring advisory board member Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower. The coalition is currently focused on social media, which is often blamed for a teen mental health crisis, Qureshi said.
But its the urgency of AI that prompted todays letter.
So, is this the issue that will catapult youth tech activists to the same visibility and influence of other youth movements?
Qureshi said he and his fellow organizers have been in touch with youth climate activists and with organizers from March for Our Lives, the student-led gun control organization.
And the tech activists are looking to push their weight around in 2024.
Revanur, who praised President Joe Biden for prioritizing tech regulation, said Encode Justice plans to make an endorsement in the upcoming presidential race, and is watching to see what his administration does on AI. The group is also considering congressional and state legislative endorsements.
But endorsements and a politely-worded letter are a far cry from the combative and controversial tactics that have put the youth climate movement in the spotlight, such as a 2019 confrontation with Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein inside her Bay Area office.
Tech activists remain open to the adversarial approach. Revanur said the risks of AI run amuck could justify more confrontational measures going forward.
We definitely do see ourselves expanding direct action, she said, because we have youth on the ground.
BEVERLY HILLS Digital money is here to stay, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said at the Milken Global Institutes annual conference today. But if people expect central bank digital currencies to upend the banking sector, they shouldnt hold their breath.
Georgieva splashed cold water on a retail CBDC which refers to tokens issued directly to the public while offering a tacit endorsement of wholesale digital currencies that could be used by banks.
We think that wholesale CBDCs can be put in place with fairly little space for undesirable surprises, she said. Retail CBDCs, on the other hand, could completely transform the financial system in a way that we dont quite know what consequences he could bring. Sam Sutton
AIs medical takeover continues apace: Todays Future Pulse newsletter reveals the results of a new study showing that ChatGPT might give real-life doctors a run for their money when it comes to bedside manner.
The study, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, took 195 question-and-answer pairings from the popular subreddit r/AskDocs, ran the same questions by ChatGPT, and then had a panel of five experts evaluate whether the real-life doctors or the AI platform gave a better response. It was no contest: The experts found that 78 percent of the time ChatGPT prevailed.
And not only that, its responses were also rated significantly more empathetic than physician responses, by a factor of almost ten. The researchers suggest using the findings not to replace, but to augment doctor-patient interactions, writing that it could be used in scenarios such as using [a] chatbot to draft responses that physicians could then edit, and that Randomized trials could assess further if using AI assistants might improve responses, lower clinician burnout, and improve patient outcomes.
Stay in touch with the whole team: Ben Schreckinger ([emailprotected]); Derek Robertson ([emailprotected]); Mohar Chatterjee ([emailprotected]); Steve Heuser ([emailprotected]); and Benton Ives ([emailprotected]). Follow us @DigitalFuture on Twitter.
If youve had this newsletter forwarded to you, you can sign up and read our mission statement at the links provided.
The rest is here:
Meet the Greta Thunberg of AI - POLITICO - POLITICO