August 21, 2024
Regulating Artificial Intelligence Must Not Undermine NIST’s Integrity
The United States is the global leader in the development of AI and is well-positioned to influence AI’s future trajectories. Decisions made today in the US will have a long-lasting impact, both domestically and globally, on how we build, use, and experience AI. However, recent legislative proposals and executive actions on AI risk entangling the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in politically charged decisions, potentially calling the organization’s neutrality into question.
This is an outcome that must be prevented. NIST plays a key role in supporting American scientific and economic leadership in AI, and a strong, respected, and politically neutral NIST is a critical component for supporting America’s leadership in technological development and innovation.
A strong NIST will continue to help build standards that are adopted globally and lay the foundation for further American AI innovation and dissemination.
For over a century, NIST has helped advance American commerce, innovation, and global technological leadership. NIST’s experts have developed groundbreaking standards, techniques, tools, and evaluations that have pushed the frontier of measurement science. Today, almost every product or service we interact with has been impacted by the “technology, measurement, and standards provided by the NIST.” More recently, in the context of ongoing global AI competition, NIST has also been active in developing important standards for AI-based systems.
Key to this success has always been NIST’s ability to keep politics away from science, remaining neutral, and focusing on what it does best: measurement science. Now, in the name of AI Safety, many emerging proposals would task NIST with conducting and evaluating AI-based systems themselves. These risks are further compounded by the introduction of an increasingly politicized AI Safety Institute (AISI). Though these points might seem trivial, the long-term implications are significant.
Read the full article from the Tech Policy Press.
More from CNAS
-
Technology & National Security / National Security Law
CNAS Insights | The Case for Long-Term CISA 2015 ReauthorizationLast fall, one of the United States’ most important cyber defense laws expired. For six weeks, the private sector no longer had legal protections to share critical cyber threa...
By Carrie Cordero & Morgan Peirce
-
Technology & National Security
Taiwan Is the Key to AI DominanceA country determined to win the defining technological race of the century can’t allow its chief rival to control the industrial base on which that race depends....
By David Feith
-
Defense / Technology & National Security
WarTalk: Iran War with Jack ShanahanThe “love tap” White House readout. A failed convoy operation. KSA pulling overflight rights. Iran with 70% of its missile force still intact. And one F-15E shoot-down from ab...
By Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan & Jordan Schneider
-
Technology & National Security
American AI Companies Can’t Get Enough ChipsIn 2026, artificial intelligence (AI) chip production has become a binding constraint on the pace of the AI compute buildout. Demand for computing power to train and deploy ad...
By James Sanders, Janet Egan & Rory Madigan
