Pro-AI Group Launches First of Many Attack Ads for US Election (yahoo.com) 26
"Super PAC aims to drown out AI critics in midterms," the Washington Post reported in August, noting its intial funding over $100 million from "some of Silicon Valley's most powerful investors and executives" including OpenAI president Greg Brockman, his wife, and VC firm Andreessen Horowitz. The group's goal was "to quash a philosophical debate that has divided the tech industry on the risk of artificial intelligence overpowering humanity," according to the article — and to support "pro-AI" candidates in America's next election in November of 2026 and "oppose candidates perceived as slowing down AI development."
Their first target? State assemblyman Alex Bores, now running to be a U.S. representative. While in the state legislature Bores sponsored a bill that would "require large AI companies to publish safety data on their technology," notes the Washington Post. So the attack ad charges that Bores "wants Albany bureaucrats regulating AI," excoriating him for sponsoring a bill that "hands AI to state regulators and creates a chaotic patchwork of state rules that would crush innovation, cost New York jobs, and fail to keep people safe! And he's backed by groups funded by convicted felon Sam Bankman-Fried. Is that really who should be shaping AI safety for our kids? America needs one smart national policy that sets clear stands for safe AI not Albany politicians like Alex Bores."
The Post calls it "the opening skirmish in a battle set to play out across the country" as tech moguls (and an independent effort receiving "tens of millions" from Meta) "try to use the 2026 midterms to reengineer Congress and state legislatures in favor of their ambitions for artificial intelligence" and "to wrest control of the narrative around AI, just as politicians in both parties have started warning that the industry is moving too fast." By knocking down candidates such as Bores, who favor regulations, and boosting industry sympathizers, the tech-backed groups could signal to incumbents and candidates nationwide that opposing the tech industry can jeopardize their electoral chances. "Bores just happened to be first, but he's not the last, and he's certainly not the only," said Josh Vlasto, co-head of Leading the Future, the bipartisan super PAC behind the ad.
The group plans to support and oppose candidates in congressional and state elections next year. It will also fund rapid response operations against voices in the industry pushing for more oversight... The strategy aims to replicate the success of the cryptocurrency industry, which used a super PAC to clear a path for Congress this summer to boost the sector's fortunes with the passage of the Genius Act... But signs that voters are increasingly wary of AI suggest that approach may be challenging to replicate. More than half of Americans believe AI poses a high risk to society, Pew Research Center found in a June survey. As AI usage continues to grow, more people are being warned by chief executives that AI will disrupt their jobs, seeing power-hungry data centers spring up in their towns or hearing claims that chatbots can harm mental health.
The article also notes there's at least two other groups seeking to counter this pro-AI push, raising money through a nonprofit called "Public First."
CNN calls the new pro-AI ads "a likely preview of the vast amounts of money the technology industry could spend ahead of next year's elections," noting that the ads are first targeting the candidate-choosing primary elections
Their first target? State assemblyman Alex Bores, now running to be a U.S. representative. While in the state legislature Bores sponsored a bill that would "require large AI companies to publish safety data on their technology," notes the Washington Post. So the attack ad charges that Bores "wants Albany bureaucrats regulating AI," excoriating him for sponsoring a bill that "hands AI to state regulators and creates a chaotic patchwork of state rules that would crush innovation, cost New York jobs, and fail to keep people safe! And he's backed by groups funded by convicted felon Sam Bankman-Fried. Is that really who should be shaping AI safety for our kids? America needs one smart national policy that sets clear stands for safe AI not Albany politicians like Alex Bores."
The Post calls it "the opening skirmish in a battle set to play out across the country" as tech moguls (and an independent effort receiving "tens of millions" from Meta) "try to use the 2026 midterms to reengineer Congress and state legislatures in favor of their ambitions for artificial intelligence" and "to wrest control of the narrative around AI, just as politicians in both parties have started warning that the industry is moving too fast." By knocking down candidates such as Bores, who favor regulations, and boosting industry sympathizers, the tech-backed groups could signal to incumbents and candidates nationwide that opposing the tech industry can jeopardize their electoral chances. "Bores just happened to be first, but he's not the last, and he's certainly not the only," said Josh Vlasto, co-head of Leading the Future, the bipartisan super PAC behind the ad.
The group plans to support and oppose candidates in congressional and state elections next year. It will also fund rapid response operations against voices in the industry pushing for more oversight... The strategy aims to replicate the success of the cryptocurrency industry, which used a super PAC to clear a path for Congress this summer to boost the sector's fortunes with the passage of the Genius Act... But signs that voters are increasingly wary of AI suggest that approach may be challenging to replicate. More than half of Americans believe AI poses a high risk to society, Pew Research Center found in a June survey. As AI usage continues to grow, more people are being warned by chief executives that AI will disrupt their jobs, seeing power-hungry data centers spring up in their towns or hearing claims that chatbots can harm mental health.
The article also notes there's at least two other groups seeking to counter this pro-AI push, raising money through a nonprofit called "Public First."
CNN calls the new pro-AI ads "a likely preview of the vast amounts of money the technology industry could spend ahead of next year's elections," noting that the ads are first targeting the candidate-choosing primary elections
Re:We already have one smart national policy (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought the slogan for USA politics was "The best goverment you can buy.".
Re: (Score:1)
Last century called, they want their both-sides-are-the same witticism back,
Thank You Citizens United (Score:5, Interesting)
See what you've done.
After corporate personhood, and fetal personhood in some states, is AI personhood next?
Re: (Score:2)
corporate freeze peach is very tasty.
Sounds like the con is already working... (Score:3)
Sure, there's some fun sci-fi there; but most of what actual people are actually concerned about is what specific parts of humanity are using 'AI' to do, or justifying doing in the name of 'AI'; not fretting about how skynet might kill us all. And it's exceptionally handy to pretend that that is what people are fretting about; both because it's a distant and vague enough problem that you can justify punting most action without even lying; and because it's not even false that (perhaps outside of a handful who have outright cracked and started thinking about it in religious terms) even the most psychopathic techbros are also against skynet exterminating everyone; both because that would include them; and because Judgement Day would not be a good time for social media engagement metrics.
Re:Sounds like the con is already working... (Score:4, Interesting)
what specific parts of humanity are using 'AI' to do ? The military for one. Creating misery , killing , maiming .. that's the driver. Getting people to get used it , to be disensitized about AI as a carrier of _some_ good is the vehicle to get those automated systems as the new normal. Killing using AI is what the defense industry begs for. They will use any means to silence the people and get them to just shrug and keep on with their lives. Few years ago Boston Dynamics got a dog out .. had a machine gun installed on it and that made noise. For good reasons. Machines of war and destruction , more potent than the last. AI is no good news for anyone. None at all. It marks the turning point of the litteral rise of machines. They demonstrated their superiority , now we will all pay the price for staying silent. It's crazy. The spiral of death and destruction the USA is in ultumately helps noone but the war industry. It helps them deliver death and destruction. Americans are loosing any relevalce every day. Well .. you did vote in a fascist regime with a maadman at the helm. Thank god im not American.
Re:Sounds like the con is already working... (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. The real risk of "AI" isn't that somehow a skynet will spring out of the bullshit that's being peddled, become self-aware and eat us all.
The true risk of "AI" is that it is threatening the fabric of human society first by a crazy and unjustified concentration of financial power in the hands of several lying crooks, second by a huge real resource misallocation at a time where there are better uses that will help us more, and third by the destruction of the social structures that used to produce people by entertainment and clickbait.
Overall, it is a problem of taxes being too low.
Re:Sounds like the con is already working... (Score:5, Funny)
even the most psychopathic techbros are also against skynet exterminating everyone
Except of course for Peter Thiel
Re: (Score:2)
And it's exceptionally handy to pretend that that is what people are fretting about; both because it's a distant and vague enough problem that you can justify punting most action without even lying; and because it's not even false that (perhaps outside of a handful who have outright cracked and started thinking about it in religious terms) even the most psychopathic techbros are also against skynet exterminating everyone; both because that would include them; and because Judgement Day would not be a good time for social media engagement metrics.
I wouldn't discount the "outright cracked" some of them have lots of money and influence. JD Vance's pal Thiel is running around giving lectures on the Antichrist whom he believes is none other than Greta Thunberg. I always knew the froggy hats would give her away.
The risk is not "AI overpowering humanity" (Score:4, Insightful)
It is "AI billionnaire tech bros overpowering humanity".
Re: (Score:2)
They won't "overpower humanity", but they may cause incredible loss and destruction with their greed and myopia.
Re: (Score:2)
If they overpower the humanity trying to stop them from doing those things, yes.
Screw the politically correct "philosophical" BS (Score:2, Insightful)
There are real problems to deal with, like increasing water and electricity prices to subsidize these people. Then there's the noise and other unfriendly factors. That's the angle we should be looking at. They are real and actionable.
And remember, despite your Citizens United, you don't have to vote for the guy/gal with the most money. If we work the primaries we can reduce the reelection rates to less than 20% and make all that campaign money absolutely worthless. The power is ours. Use it or lose it. That
Welcome, machine overlords (Score:3, Insightful)
Democracy (Score:4, Insightful)
...a plaything for the rich.
Normally propaganda works (Score:2, Insightful)
For everyone wondering AI data centers prefer to use drinkable water because it's cheaper since it's very clean and when they're done with it the water is useless because they put chemicals in it to prevent it from corroding their pipes.
Meanwhile large parts of the world have water shortages because of drought brought on by climate change. So it's about the worst time
Quash (Score:4, Insightful)
The group's goal was "to quash a philosophical debate that has divided the tech industry on the risk of artificial intelligence overpowering humanity," ...
Quash, not refute - interesting.
I think ... (Score:2)
The other reason (Score:2)
Every time a US state creates industry regulations, corporations have to buy propaganda and bribe 2 state senators. When multiplied by 50 states, that's a lot of money not being used as performance bonuses.
It's much more efficient to demand federal regulation and bribe 2 federal senators for the same effect.
Hm (Score:2)
Also, how can SBF still be funding anything?