Simulation Day!

 For Monday, read 

• Hamilton, Federalist # 47, 48, 57, 63.
• Tocqueville, 196-230.
• Ronald Reagan, Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Florida, March 8, 1983.

For your writeup, pick one thing you learned about the presidency in class this week and apply it to this week's news.

https://www.cfr.org/education/teach/simulations/regulating-ai

President Arya
Vice President  Jessica
Secretary of Defense Graham
Secretary of State Muskaan
Secretary of Energy Edden
Secretary of Commerce Gavia
Secretary of Labor Philip
Attorney General Ben
Secretary of Homeland Security Caleb
Chair, Federal Trade Commission Lucas
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (aka the National Security Advisor) Annie Chen
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Nikhil
Chief of Staff Sabi
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy Aryaa
Director of National Intelligence Lily
CIA Director Isabella 
FBI Director Nate
White House Counsel  Alex
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Annie Long

NSC members should consider the following policy options:

Pursue an international governing regime for AI. An international framework could produce widely adopted, responsible AI regulations that limit the worst harms of AI. Taking a leading role in negotiations could maximize U.S. influence over their outcome. However, an international framework would be difficult to negotiate. It could force the United States to compromise by accepting limitations it deemed harmful to innovation or allowing practices it deemed against its interests or values. Moreover, slow negotiations could fail to reach decisions at a pace required to keep up with the speed of AI development.

Pursue federal regulation measures. This option could entail executive action to set standards for AI use within the United States. Such action would grant the federal government significant influence over AI governance within U.S. borders and could prioritize striking a balance between protecting Americans and fostering innovation. To the extent that U.S. AI technology is used internationally, national regulations could also have some measure of global influence. However, regulatory regimes are notoriously slow to develop and may inevitably be reactive in nature when faced with such a fast-moving technology, unnecessarily and slowing down AI adoption in the United States while other countries race ahead.

Limit AI governance. This option could entail limiting new AI regulations, rejecting the development of international AI bodies or agreements, rolling back existing governance mechanisms, or demanding a moratorium on all moves to regulate AI at the state level. This could help to maximize AI development and adoption by creating an enabling environment for rapidly-evolving use cases and technological capabilities. It would also require a high risk tolerance for dangerous uses of AI at scale, and it would give primacy to a small number of AI developers at the expense of allowing democratic mechanisms to balance societal impacts and priorities.