The Alaska House of Representatives is moving toward new restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence computer software that can be used to disguise a person's voice or appearance.
A vote could take place in the House of Representatives as early as Thursday. House Bill 358It prohibits the use of falsified photos, videos or sound clips to influence elections unless the fakes, known as “deepfakes,” come with a disclaimer attached.
On Wednesday, lawmakers debated amendments to the proposal and rejected a complete ban on deepfakes in elections by a 16-24 vote.
Rep. Justin Loughridge (R-Soldotna) proposed the ban, saying that by definition, deepfakes are intended to “deceive people” and therefore should not be allowed.
Rep. Sarah Vance (R-Homer) is co-chair of the House Judiciary Committee and the lead sponsor of the bill.
The committee has held eight hearings on AI software this year, and he said lawmakers must balance the First Amendment with their desire to regulate entirely new software. Ta.
The commission uses “national industry standards” for AI, and while the AI deepfakes issue has not been decided in court, “that means it could go either way,” the ban is “a first amendment law.” “This will further heighten concerns about the provisions of the Act.” ” than the disclaimer in the current bill.
Vance said he believes if a candidate used a deepfake of their opponent, it would backfire.
Rep. David Eastman (R-Wasilla) proposed six amendments to the bill, all of which were defeated, but House members have since debated whether artificial intelligence should be defined as human. It happened.
Eastman suggested amending the bill. Excluding AI from the definition of human.
Lawmakers overwhelmingly voted against the proposal, making Eastman the only lawmaker in the 40-member House to vote against AI personalities.
Rep. Jesse Sumner (R-Anchorage) said the development of AI could eventually lead to artificial intelligence that can reason and make decisions independent of human interaction.
Sumner said, half-jokingly, that if a truly independent artificial intelligence were developed, he would like to think that “it would read the statutes…and obey them.”
Rep. Jamie Allard (R-Eagle River, a member of the Judiciary Committee) spoke out against one of Eastman's earlier amendments, saying that lawmakers, or the general public, should not consider the current legal limits on AI. If they are dissatisfied with the situation, they should stay put, he said. Involved.
“We're going to be here again next year. We're going to keep doing this until we can keep up with the ever-changing artificial intelligence,” she said.
Get the morning headlines delivered to your inbox
