Biden Battered Over AI Diffusion Policy

The Biden administration’s eleventh-hour move to regulate how American artificial intelligence technology is shared with the world is being criticized by the country’s tech sector.

According to the White House, the Interim Final Rule on Artificial Intelligence (IFR) streamlines licensing for both large and small chip orders, strengthens U.S. leadership in AI, and provides clarity to allied and partner countries on what benefits they can get from the AI. He added that it builds on previous chip controls by cracking down on smuggling, closing other loopholes and raising AI security standards.

A new rule is necessary, he argues: “[t]o strengthen U.S. national security and economic strength.”

“[I]It is critical that we do not take this critical technology overseas and that the world’s artificial intelligence operates on American lines,” it said. “It is important to work with AI companies and foreign governments to implement critical security and trust standards as they build out their AI ecosystems.”

Stephen Kowski, Field Technical Director SlashNextThe Pleasanton, Calif.-based computer and network security company explained that the rule attempts to strike the right balance between protecting advanced artificial intelligence capabilities and maintaining technology leadership.

“Given the increasing sophistication of cyber threats and the potential abuse of AI systems, protecting AI infrastructure and computing resources is critical,” he told TechNewsWorld. “Strict controls on the export of AI chips can help prevent advanced capabilities from being used in ways that could compromise security or enable malicious activity.”

“At its core, economic innovation and national security are intertwined,” added Jeff Le, vice president of global government affairs and public policy at Safety Scorecardcybersecurity rating company in New York.

“Global competition in supply and computing is key to sustainable progress in the AI ​​race and is critical to surpassing China’s ambitions,” he told TechNewsWorld. “There is a link to concerns about Chinese backends and digital vulnerabilities that exist for American data and intellectual property. Reducing interdependence serves as a vital national security imperative and also allows us to strengthen our supply chains, which pose significant vulnerabilities, as evidenced by China’s saber-rattling on Taiwan.”

Undermining economic growth

Critics of the rule, which takes effect in 120 days, say it will do more harm than good.

“Today, companies, startups and universities around the world are using mainstream AI to advance healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing, education and countless other areas, driving economic growth and unlocking the potential of countries,” Ned Finkle, Vice President of Government Relations. Nvidia, a major manufacturer of chips used in artificial intelligence applications, wrote in a company blog.

“Building on American technology, the adoption of artificial intelligence around the world is driving growth and opening opportunities for industries at home and abroad,” he continued. “This global progress is now at risk. The Biden administration now seeks to restrict access to essential computing applications with its unprecedented and misguided “artificial intelligence proliferation” rule, which threatens to undermine innovation and economic growth around the world.”

“In its final days in office, the Biden administration is attempting to undermine American leadership with a 200-plus page regulatory quagmire drafted in secret and without adequate legislative review,” he said. “This widespread abuse will result in bureaucratic control over how America’s leading semiconductors, computers, systems and even software are developed and sold around the world.”

“And in its efforts to rig market outcomes and stifle competition—the source of innovation—the new Biden administration threatens to squander America’s hard-won technological advantage,” he said.

“Although these rules are disguised as an ‘anti-China measure,’ they will do nothing to improve U.S. security,” he added. “The new rules will control technologies around the world, including technologies that are already widely available in mainstream gaming PCs and consumer hardware. Rather than mitigating any threat, Biden’s new rules will only weaken America’s global competitiveness, undermining the innovation that keeps the US ahead.”

Policy gaps could undermine US leadership in artificial intelligence

Daniel Castro, vice president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a research and government organization in Washington, D.C., argues that the IFR raises serious concerns about its potential impact on U.S. competitiveness, global AI leadership, and international alliances.

“By pressuring other countries to choose between the United States and China, the administration risks alienating key partners and inadvertently strengthening China’s position in the global artificial intelligence ecosystem,” he said in a statement.

“Faced with such an ultimatum, many countries could choose the side that offers them uninterrupted access to artificial intelligence technologies vital to their economic growth and digital future – and currently only one country threatens to cut them off from these technologies.”

Moreover, Castro added, the IFR’s narrow focus on regulating closed-weight AI models while leaving open-weight equivalents unaddressed creates a glaring and counterproductive imbalance.

“American companies developing their own artificial intelligence models will face strict regulatory restrictions that foreign competitors can avoid by using open source alternatives,” he explained. “These policies undermine the position of U.S. firms in global markets and fail to meaningfully mitigate the risks that regulation is designed to address.”

“Rather than strengthening national security or protecting U.S. technological leadership, the administration’s approach risks allowing rivals to accelerate their advances and surpass the United States in this important area,” he said.

“The administration’s initial restrictions on chip exports were wrong, and the IFR compounds that mistake,” he added. “Instead of correcting course, the administration continues to pursue counterproductive policies that undermine U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence while providing rivals with a clearer path to dominance. The United States should work to strengthen its position as a global leader in artificial intelligence by promoting innovation, strengthening alliances, and making U.S. technology widely available to legitimate users around the world.”

“A strategy based on competitiveness rather than containment will best serve America’s interests in the digital economy of the future,” Castro said.

Short term gains, long term losses

Agreeing with the core goals of the IFR, Professor of Engineering at the University of Pennsylvania Benjamin Lee does not agree with the approach taken to achieve these goals. “Maintaining U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence—both hardware architecture and software models—is essential for national security and economic power,” he told TechNewsWorld.

However, Lee noted that US leadership means its companies are building an ecosystem of hardware and software that forms the basis for global AI computing. “While the administration’s regulations and export controls provide a narrow short-term benefit, they could cause broader, longer-term damage to American technology leadership,” he said.

“In the short term, export controls will slow the deployment of the most advanced GPUs and largest artificial intelligence data centers in some countries,” he explained. “But in the long term, export controls will force other countries to develop their own hardware architectures or software models.”

“Much of this technology is based on openly published resources or code, which reduces the barriers to creating alternatives to American technology if necessary,” he continued. “Export controls could also result in the United States being less attentive to the latest technological advances in other countries.”

“Ten years ago, similar controls on Intel processor exports aimed at slowing the growth of high-performance scientific computing in China led to a surge in computer engineering within China,” he added. “American experts are now less aware of the state of Chinese supercomputers.”

Unintended consequences of AI blocking policies

IFR is trying to establish a national “lock-in,” said Rob Enderle, IFR president and chief analyst. Enderle Groupconsulting firm in Bend, Oregon.

“While lock-in—the practice of forcing customers to use only your technology—can work for a short period of time, as IBM has demonstrated for several decades, it can also create a trend away from your technology, which is what happened with IBM and may now happen.” with the US,” he told TechNewsWorld. “This move, while sound from a tactical perspective, is strategically suicidal in the long term for AI technology in the US.”

“I think this rule was designed with the best intentions, but poorly thought out by people who either don’t understand the technology or the market in which it operates,” he added. “This would likely harm U.S. interests and security in artificial intelligence over the long term in exchange for dubious short-term benefits, leaving U.S. companies unable to compete with their foreign counterparts at a time when U.S. technology is superior, and assures that It won’t happen like that.” long-term.”

“China’s capabilities are growing faster than the United States, largely due to the Chinese government taking a much more aggressive stance in promoting technology development,” Enderle said. “If the US does not respond properly, the technology market will follow oil, trains, electronics and cars to other countries, most likely China.”

Chris Bondi, CEO and Co-Founder Mimotothe San Francisco-based threat detection and response company added that one of the most frustrating things about any administration’s executive orders is that they tend to be “all or nothing.” “Regulations are necessary, but they must address access, monitoring and use of AI,” she told TechNewsWorld.

“While I agree that the use and protection of AI is critical to U.S. national security and economic strength, this form of isolationism will undermine innovation,” she said. “Not all developments are made in the United States. Instead of protecting, the bubble this rule will create will limit the U.S. ability to grow and compete globally.”