Following yesterday’s release of the Biden administration’s first artificial intelligence-focused national security memo, analysts and technology policy advocates are paying close attention to the effectiveness of the memo’s implementation.
Because the memo identifies a series of actions for the federal government to take that will help secure U.S. leadership in AI innovation – including securing the supply chain, forming a new specialized coordination group and streamlining visa processes for applicants with STEM backgrounds – – policy experts are calling for strong oversight of the implementation of these actions.
“The use of AI in the context of national security involves important decisions that impact fundamental rights and freedoms,” said Samir Jain, vice president of policy at the Center for Democracy and Technology, in comments sent to Next Government/FCW. “The National Security Memorandum takes important and meaningful steps to protect those rights, although the proof will be in its implementation. It is crucial that the use of AI is subject to democratic accountability, despite the legitimate need for secrecy; we cannot rely on national security agencies to do their own homework.”
Identifying specific high-impact use cases, a task outlined in the memo’s accompanying Framework to Advance AI Governance and Risk Management in National Security, was also well received by industry leaders.
Dave Prakash, head of AI governance at Booz Allen, shared Next Government/FCW that highlighting prohibited high-risk use cases helps build a stronger path forward in establishing routine risk management and AI governance practices.
Crucially, Prakash added that AI research and development will not be hampered by these regulations, a balance that both lawmakers and policy officials have been working towards.
“We believe that these measures will not hinder innovation, but rather increase public confidence in AI systems used by the U.S. government for national security, thereby driving AI adoption in the long term accelerated,” he said.
But not all industry players trust that regulations will toe the line between safety and stifling innovation.
“One of the biggest threats to U.S. leadership in AI—and therefore to national security—comes not from foreign actors, but from U.S. regulators. The monitoring of this memo does not directly address this risk. In particular, antitrust regulators’ efforts to break up leading U.S. technology companies and investigate U.S. AI chipmakers would harm U.S. competitiveness in AI and help strategic competitors like China advance,” said Daniel, director of the Center for Data Innovation and vice president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Castro.
He noted that stricter regulations from allies like the EU will hinder US competitiveness in AI, meaning the memo’s call for international AI governance “rings hollow.”
“Furthermore, efforts to influence the Global South through normative frameworks are being overshadowed by China’s economic diplomacy and infrastructure investments. Consequently, this part of the memo appears to be more aspirational than practical,” Castro added.
But the memo’s instruction to publish more guidance regarding AI and its impact on cybersecurity protocols was a welcome addition. Melissa Ruzzi, director of AI at software-as-a-service company AppOmni, said making decisions based on data will be key to measuring the effectiveness of the memo’s provisions.
“The actions mentioned in the memo are great starting points to get a good picture of the status quo and to obtain enough information to make decisions based on data,” Ruzzi said in a statement. Next Government/FCW. “The data…[that] the needs to be gathered about the actions is not trivial, and even with the data, assumptions and trade-offs will be necessary for the final decision making. Making decisions after collecting data is the big challenge.”
