Define Before You Measure: The Case for Regulating Poorly-Scoped Tech
averyfjames · x · 2026-09-16
A discussion on whether AI can be regulated when its core concepts are hard to define. davidmanheim argues you must define things before measuring them, or terminology disputes render measurements meaningless.
Key points:
- Counterargument: regulating nuclear reactors requires defining fission and measuring fissile material — what if AI lacks that?
- Rebuttal: states routinely regulate poorly-scoped domains — designer drugs keep getting added to illegal drug definitions, and nuclear power is partly regulated by restricting everything radioactive, fissile or not.
- Conclusion: precise, measurable definitions are better, but their absence isn't a knock-down argument against regulating at all.
Related event: Manheim: define before measuring—AGI debate will be moot within two years(7 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Alpha School investigation: 17 campuses on probation, Bill Ackman as shadow lead, Holmes involved — benjaminjriley · 2026-11-02
- Google's chief economist: AI will transform more jobs than it kills — gains come from redesigning workflows — danielrock · 2026-11-02
- Daniel Lemire: AI is exploding demand for boring compute, server CPUs to double — lemire · 2026-11-02
- Alignment researcher: the word "aligned" implies consistencies that don't exist — davidmanheim · 2026-11-02
- By 2035, Indian Parents Will Ask How Many Agents You Manage, Not Your Salary — theteknosaur · 2026-11-02
- Under 5% of US consumers pay for AI, yet compute demand is already forcing usage cuts — NinaDSchick · 2026-11-02