\n
![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/AP24101792369654-e1712835487721.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n [ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
Don Beyer\u2019s car dealerships were among the first in the U.S. to set up a website. As a representative, the Virginia Democrat leads a bipartisan group focused on promoting fusion energy. He reads books about geometry for fun.<\/p>\n
So when questions about regulating artificial intelligence emerged, the 73-year-old Beyer took what for him seemed like an obvious step, enrolling at George Mason University to get a master\u2019s degree in machine learning. In an era when lawmakers and\u00a0Supreme Court justices sometimes concede they don\u2019t understand<\/a>\u00a0emerging technology, Beyer\u2019s journey is an outlier, but it highlights a broader effort by members of Congress to educate themselves about artificial intelligence as they consider laws that would shape its development.<\/p>\n Frightening to some, thrilling to others, baffling to many: Artificial intelligence has been called a transformative technology, a threat to democracy or even an\u00a0existential risk for humanity<\/a>. It will fall to members of Congress to figure out how to\u00a0regulate the industry<\/a>\u00a0in a way that encourages its\u00a0potential benefits<\/a>\u00a0while mitigating the worst risks.<\/p>\n But first they have to understand what AI is, and what it isn\u2019t.<\/p>\n \u201cI tend to be an AI optimist,\u201d\u00a0Beyer<\/a>\u00a0told The Associated Press following a recent afternoon class on George Mason\u2019s campus in suburban Virginia. \u201cWe can\u2019t even imagine how different our lives will be in five years, 10 years, 20 years, because of AI. \u2026 There won\u2019t be\u00a0robots with red eyes<\/a>\u00a0coming after us any time soon. But there are other deeper existential risks that we need to pay attention to.\u201d<\/p>\n Risks like massive job losses in industries made obsolete by AI, programs that retrieve\u00a0biased<\/a>\u00a0or\u00a0inaccurate results<\/a>, or\u00a0deepfake images, video and audio<\/a>\u00a0that could be leveraged for\u00a0political disinformation<\/a>,\u00a0scams<\/a>\u00a0or\u00a0sexual exploitation<\/a>. On the other side of the equation, onerous\u00a0regulations<\/a>\u00a0could stymie innovation, leaving the U.S. at a disadvantage as\u00a0other nations look to harness the power<\/a>\u00a0of AI.<\/p>\n Striking the right balance will require input not only from tech companies but also from the industry\u2019s critics, as well as from the industries that AI may transform. While many Americans may have formed their ideas about AI from\u00a0science fiction movies<\/a>\u00a0like\u00a0\u201cThe Terminator\u201d<\/a>\u00a0or \u201cThe Matrix,\u201d it\u2019s important that lawmakers have a clear-eyed understanding of the technology, said Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and the chairman of the House\u2019s AI Task Force.<\/p>\n When lawmakers have questions about AI, Obernolte is one of the people they seek out. He studied engineering and applied science at the California Institute of Technology and earned an M.S. in artificial intelligence at UCLA. The California Republican also started his own video game company. Obernolte said he\u2019s been \u201cvery pleasantly impressed\u201d with how seriously his colleagues on both sides of the aisle are taking their responsibility to understand AI.<\/p>\n That shouldn\u2019t be surprising, Obernolte said. After all, lawmakers regularly vote on bills that touch on complicated legal, financial, health and scientific subjects. If you think computers are complicated, check out the rules governing Medicaid and Medicare.<\/p>\n Keeping up with the pace of technology has challenged Congress since the\u00a0steam engine<\/a>\u00a0and the\u00a0cotton gin<\/a>\u00a0transformed the nation\u2019s industrial and agricultural sectors. Nuclear power and weaponry is another example of a highly technical subject that lawmakers have had to contend with in recent decades, according to Kenneth Lowande, a University of Michigan political scientist who has studied expertise and how it relates to policy-making in Congress.<\/p>\n Federal lawmakers have created several offices \u2014 the\u00a0Library of Congress<\/a>, the\u00a0Congressional Budget Office<\/a>, etc. \u2014 to provide resources and specialized input when necessary. They also rely on staff with specific expertise on subject topics, including technology.<\/p>\n Then there\u2019s another, more informal form of education that many members of Congress receive.<\/p>\n \u201cThey have interest groups and lobbyists banging down their door to give them briefings,\u201d Lowande said.<\/p>\n Beyer said he\u2019s had a lifelong interest in computers and that when AI emerged as a topic of public interest he wanted to know more. A lot more. Almost all of his fellow students are decades younger; most don\u2019t seem that fazed when they discover their classmate is a congressman, Beyer said.<\/p>\n He said the classes, which he fits in around his busy congressional schedule \u2014 are already paying off. He\u2019s learned about the development of AI and the challenges facing the field. He said it\u2019s helped him understand the challenges \u2014\u00a0biases<\/a>,\u00a0unreliable data<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 and the possibilities, like improved cancer diagnoses and more efficient supply chains.<\/p>\n Beyer is also learning how to write computer code.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m finding that learning to code \u2014 which is thinking in this sort of mathematical, algorithmic step-by-step, is helping me think differently about a lot of other things \u2014 how you put together an office, how you work a piece of legislation,\u201d Beyer said.<\/p>\n While a computer science degree isn\u2019t required, it\u2019s imperative that lawmakers understand AI\u2019s implications for the economy,\u00a0national defense<\/a>,\u00a0health care<\/a>, education, personal privacy and intellectual property rights, according to Chris Pierson, CEO of the cybersecurity firm BlackCloak.<\/p>\n \u201cAI is not good or bad,\u201d said Pierson, who formerly worked in Washington for the Department of Homeland Security. \u201cIt\u2019s how you use it.\u201d<\/p>\n The work of safeguarding AI has already begun, though it\u2019s the executive branch leading the way so far. Last month, the White House unveiled\u00a0new rules<\/a>\u00a0that require federal agencies to show their use of AI isn\u2019t harming the public. Under an\u00a0executive order<\/a>\u00a0issued last year, AI developers must provide information on the safety of their products.<\/p>\n When it comes to more substantive action, America is playing catchup to the\u00a0European Union<\/a>, which recently\u00a0enacted the world\u2019s first significant rules<\/a>\u00a0governing the development and use of AI. The rules prohibit some uses \u2014 routine AI-enabled facial recognition by law enforcement, for one \u2014 while requiring other programs to submit information about safety and public risks. The landmark law is expected to serve as a blueprint for other nations as they contemplate their own AI laws.<\/p>\n As Congress begins that process, the focus must be on \u201cmitigating potential harm,\u201d said Obernolte, who said he\u2019s optimistic that lawmakers from both parties can find common ground on ways to prevent the worst AI risks.<\/p>\n \u201cNothing substantive is going to get done that isn\u2019t bipartisan,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n To help guide the conversation lawmakers created a new AI task force (Obernolte is co-chairman), as well as an AI Caucus made up of lawmakers with a particular expertise or interest in the topic. They\u2019ve invited experts to brief lawmakers on the technology and its impacts \u2014 and not just computer scientists and tech gurus either, but also representatives from different sectors that see their own risks and rewards in AI.<\/p>\n Rep. Anna Eshoo<\/a>\u00a0is the Democratic chairwoman of the caucus. She represents part of California\u2019s Silicon Valley and recently\u00a0introduced legislation<\/a>\u00a0that would require tech companies and social media platforms like Meta, Google<\/a> or TikTok to identify and label AI-generated\u00a0deepfakes<\/a>\u00a0to ensure the public isn\u2019t misled. She said the caucus has already proved its worth as a \u201csafe place\u201d place where lawmakers can ask questions, share resources and begin to craft consensus.<\/p>\n \u201cThere isn\u2019t a bad or silly question,\u201d she said. \u201cYou have to understand something before you can accept or reject it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n