Thank you so much for sharing. I’m glad I ran into this recording. Very informative and high-quality discussion.

We DO NOT need Government to regulate Computer Programming (AI). Big media and big government are just trying to scare people into giving up their liberty for some faux safety. AI has down loaded the complete Wikipedia, so it is completely unreliable. Garbage In, Garbage Out. One result would be a very liberal biased chat bot. Wikipedia maybe good for looking up facts on programming or other items, but when it comes to the political and science, the data is skewed to the LEFT. (By the way, it HAS been trained on wiki data and is biased) Liability example: how does OpenAI address potential liability concerns when ChatGPT is used in healthcare decision-making? I would think the liability remains with the doctor. Much like you can’t blame the Gun for a Murder. AI, like a gun, is just a tool. Responsibility remains with the one who uses it. (Whatever it is) AI is just another tool. AI will not create consciousness. It will not become sentient. The two aspects of the universe are informational (nonmaterial) and physical (material). Computers are composed 100% of physical entities, and consciousness is 100% in the information domain. Government should not regulate computer programming (AI). Let the Industry or market place regulate AI but don’t regulate it by laws. I would like to see the programs and algorithms as Open Source. Like every other computer program, it is not self-aware, and has no free will. Someone programmed it to say such things, to be biased, to influence, monetize, and to change people's social behavior. AI is a computer program and has no need of an "AI Bill Of Rights". AI has No Rights. But the President of the United States already has the "Blue Print for An AI Bill of Rights". - If the World Economic Forum (WEF Davos) and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) want More Government regulations, do you think that they are doing so for the good of humanity, or are they just wanting to increase their world government power and agenda. The European Union already has the EU GDPR or the General Data Protection Regulation, is the world’s strongest data security and privacy law, implemented by the European Union in 2018. One part this legislation requires human intervention in some automated decision making. We do not need to have civil rights protections made applicable to AI. Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate AI. That does not mean they won’t do it. It will end results into a disaster. Keep Programming Free from Government Interference. I have thought about Artificial Intelligence and I think it would be constitutional and necessary to add one item to the US Public Law on Copyrights. Please just add a definition to the word AUTHORS to say, that Author is to be defined as Human. You must be human to copyright something (even if created by a computer). That way any output from AI, (image, picture, song, voice, science, math) cannot be copyright, only a human can copyright the output, thus the copyright would apply to a person. Copyright law (Title 17, U.S.C.), does not define the word “author”, so just define it as Human. Just as the Constitution gives the USA NO authority to dictate to any country the type of weapons they can Have. So be it with AI. The constitution and common sense tells you that you can not govern computer programming on a world basis. Or constitutionally within the USA. More Deep State trying to scare you, Remember, Sam Altman attended the Bilderburg2023. Remember, Sam Altman attended the Bilderburg2023. I doubt the integrity of any of the Biderburgers, World Economic Forum, Council on Foreign Relations, Deep State crowd. The US should make the copyright law to say the Author has to be Human to obtain a copyright. So if you use AI to make a copy of a copyrighted image, that would be ok, but if you tried to sell or make money or copyright it, that would be illegal. AI has No Rights. People have Rights. -- The only issue I see with AI is copyrights. I know that someone used AI to create a picture and tried to copyright or get a patent on it as the author is AI. The patent office refused (good call) and said they have to use the owner of the computers name. BUT that is just for now, what if they sue in court and get it ruled the other way? The solution is to update the copyright laws to define Author as Human only. That is the fix. The US is dreaming if they think they can regulate AI, as the World is full of computer programmers. I would ask to see the algorithm that they use to censor out Hate, False truths, and Lies. will you make public the algorithm to determine what is HATE speech? Government has no Constitutional authority to regulate computer programming.

No lawyer will take my fake rape case and conservator life case ive been delt since prob 3rd grade. If not always. 230 has to demand apple and coverage company over rule people not being able to speak for self. Im used in so many ways to even child molestation case and im wondering why would this. Be said and now people are trying to kill me as the cop drops them off