Wild West Of Artificial Intelligence

HARTFORD, CT – Connecticut State Senator James Maroney issued a statement Friday decrying the government’s failure to come up with regulations for artificial intelligence as misuse of the technology continues in the open market. 

Maroney’s statement was a response to a report from the New York Times that Lovo Inc. – an AI startup – was being sued by two voice actors who claim that the company paid them less than $1,500 for samples of their voices, and then made more than $7 million using them for different marketing pitches.

Maroney said that the report is just another instance of a misuse of the advanced technology that is quickly proliferating.

“This is yet another example of the ‘Wild West’ of AI technology leading to unintended and negative consequences,” Maroney wrote. “This is exploitative and wrong, the exact kind of malfeasance that occurs when there are no protections in place for the use of AI. While Senate Bill 2 didn’t become law this year in Connecticut, stories like these only reaffirm our need to pass legislation that approaches this technology with seriousness and thoroughness to protect against exploitation.”

SB 2 – which would have put Connecticut at the forefront of AI regulation and set barriers as to how the technology could and couldn’t be used and developed in the state – was passed in the Senate with a 24-12 vote along party lines. But it was not called for a vote in the House after Gov. Ned Lamont signaled that he would not sign it if it reached his desk.

The bill was opposed by Republicans in both chambers. 

Maroney, who was the main proponent of the bill, said in a written statement Friday that even after “numerous changes” to the bill, the veto threat from Lamont remained.

“We saw, in the last 15 years, how light regulations impacted how social media and other emerging technologies transformed our world,” Maroney said. “They have benefitted us in many ways, but harmed society in others. We cannot make the same mistake with AI and every year we wait puts society farther and farther behind the 8-ball.”

Maroney said in his statement that the potential threat of AI was “well understood” by Democrats in the Connecticut Senate, and added that the bill had cosponsorship from over half of the Democratic caucus in the House.

“Unfortunately, this broad-based support and the very real and ongoing discrimination AI is causing in our society was not enough to persuade the Governor,” his statement continued. “Ultimately, that doomed the bill.”

The Lamont administration was not immediately available to comment on this story. 

However, Lamont was asked why he didn’t support SB 2 during a news conference immediately following the legislative session.

“Look, we agreed on a lot of stuff and things that were enforceable and understandable, the deep fakes and the water marks and the election fraud and the workforce, which was well over half the bill,” Lamont said. “We could have gotten some passed. And I would be able to take that to other states. That was good to do. Then the question is, how much do you regulate the startup industries in a place like AI where it’s just so brand new?” 

Lamont said he’d spoken to Colorado’s governor on the topic.

“And you want 50 states to do their own thing, or is that maybe not the right way in a field like this that is so fast changing? And I talked to Governor Colorado, because remember it was Connecticut and Colorado, and they didn’t go for it either, at least in my understanding. We said, maybe we should take the lead and work with other states. If you don’t think the Fed is going to do it, whatever you do, you don’t want one state to do it. You want this done on a much broader basis.”

Asked if he’d been hearing from startups or venture capital about the bill, and where he’d gotten his information regarding his concerns, he responded in the affirmative.

“Yes, I mean, I’m in the startup world, that’s sort of a place where I live, and a lot of them said all other things being equal, if it’s more likely I get sued in Connecticut than I do in Georgia, maybe I’ll start my company in Georgia,” Lamont said. 

Attorney General William Tong has put his support behind individual causes concerning the use of AI, such as advocating this year for adding the technology to a 2015 law that outlawed “revenge porn.” 

Tong also issued a joint warning letter with 50 other attorneys general to a company that reportedly made fake, AI-generated robocalls to New Hampshire residents attempting to dissuade them from voting in their primary elections.

“This was a deeply disturbing use of artificial intelligence to disrupt and discourage voter participation. If it happened in New Hampshire, we need to assume this will continue to occur again,” Tong said in a February press release of the incident. 

Several other states have brought forth legislation similar to SB 2, with attorneys general in several states backing their respective bills.

Last week, Colorado passed Senate Bill 205, which would give the state the authority to broadly regulate artificial intelligence if it is signed into law. 

Reportedly, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis is considering vetoing the legislation, while Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser supports new rules and regulations for AI.