Fox News contributor Joe Concha joins "Fox & Friends First" to discuss Elon Musk's warning that AI could threaten elections and his concerns on the declining birth rate. The top lawyer for OpenAI, the company that developed ChatGPT, argued that the best way to regulate artificial intelligence is not to start with government mandated rules and regulations but to allow the companies themselves to set standards that ensure AI is used safely and responsibly. OpenAI General Counsel Jason Kwon made that argument during a Tuesday panel discussion in Washington, D.C., which was hosted by BSA/The Software Alliance, even as he acknowledged that AI is developing so quickly that it can often lead to unexpected results that companies quickly need to rein in. Still, when asked what his message to policymakers was, Kwon recommended voluntary, industry-led standards for AI, calling for a tactic that many companies in most industries tend to favor over government mandates. The top lawyer at OpenAI, run by CEO Sam Altman, above, said this week that the company recommends voluntary industry standards to regulate AI, not government mandates.

Meta is open-sourcing an AI tool called ImageBind that predicts connections between data similar to how humans perceive or imagine an environment. While image generators like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and DALL-E 2 pair words with images, allowing you to generate visual scenes based only on a text description, ImageBind casts a broader net. It can link text, images / videos, audio, 3D measurements (depth), temperature data (thermal), and motion data (from inertial measurement units) -- and it does this without having to first train on every possibility. It's an early stage of a framework that could eventually generate complex environments from an input as simple as a text prompt, image or audio recording (or some combination of the three). You could view ImageBind as moving machine learning closer to human learning.

That's why AI pioneer Anthropic has imbued its generative AI, Claude, with a mix of 10 secret principles of fairness, which it unveiled in March. In a blog post Tuesday, the company further explained how its Constitutional AI system is designed and how it is intended to operate. Normally, when an generative AI model is being trained, there's a human in the loop to provide quality control and feedback on the outputs -- like when ChatGPT or Bard asks you rate your conversations with their systems. "For us, this involved having human contractors compare two responses," the Anthropic team wrote. "from a model and select the one they felt was better according to some principle (for example, choosing the one that was more helpful, or more harmless)."

It's easy to freak out about more advanced artificial intelligence--and much more difficult to know what to do about it. Anthropic, a startup founded in 2021 by a group of researchers who left OpenAI, says it has a plan. Anthropic is working on AI models similar to the one used to power OpenAI's ChatGPT. But the startup announced today that its own chatbot, Claude, has a set of ethical principles built in that define what it should consider right and wrong, which Anthropic calls the bot's "constitution." Jared Kaplan, a cofounder of Anthropic, says the design feature shows how the company is trying to find practical engineering solutions to sometimes fuzzy concerns about the downsides of more powerful AI. "We're very concerned, but we also try to remain pragmatic," he says.

People say things such as "AI art is garbage" and "It's plagiarism," but also "AI art is going to destroy creativity itself." These reactions are contradictory, but nobody seems to notice. AI is the bogeyman in the shadows: The obscurity, more than anything the monster has actually perpetrated, is the source of loathing and despair. Consider the ongoing feud between the Writers Guild of America and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers. The writers are on strike, arguing, among other things, that studios should not be able to use AI tools to replace their labor.

There's no shortage of concern about the speed with which some of the world's top artificial intelligence research labs are rolling out new AI tools that could change the way we live and work. The release of generative AI tools like ChatGPT to the public has prompted consternation about privacy and the spread of misinformation and bias. Not long after Microsoft released an AI-powered version of its search tool, Bing, to a select group of users in February, Bing threatened a philosophy professor with blackmail. A month later, some of the biggest names in tech signed an open letter urging the world's leading artificial intelligence labs to pause training their super-powerful computer systems for six months, arguing that recent advances in AI present "profound risks to society and humanity." In an op-ed in TIME the same day, Eliezer Yudkowsky, a decision theorist who leads the nonprofit Machine Intelligence Research Institute, urged the labs to shut down their research entirely.

In 2020, 5,000 customer service agents mostly based in the Philippines became guinea pigs in an experiment testing a question that by 2023 would feel urgent: Can an AI assistant based on OpenAI's text-generation technology make workers more productive? The automated helper offered agents suggested responses to small-business owners seeking tech support. The bot had been trained on previous customer chats, with a special emphasis on answers from top performers. And sure enough, when MIT and Stanford researchers analyzed the results, the AI tool had boosted the support team's productivity by 14 percent. When the National Bureau for Economic Research, a nonprofit, published those results in late April, they were quickly seized upon as confirmation that ChatGPT-style bots would indeed transform work. But for the researchers conducting the study, the results raised a provocative new question: Should the top workers whose chats trained the bot be compensated?

Showing off new tech to customers, the media and investors is key given the perception from analysts and industry observers that Google fumbled its March launch of the "Bard" chatbot, four months after OpenAI debuted ChatGPT and after Microsoft rebooted its Bing search engine with ChatGPT. For most of its two decades, Google has enjoyed a reputation as the undisputed leader in its core business areas. Google Search has no serious competitors, and Google Maps, Gmail, and the Chrome web browser dominate their product categories so deeply that antitrust authorities in multiple countries have launched investigations or filed lawsuits alleging that the company is breaking competition laws. That dominance allowed the company to grow ever bigger, hiring thousands of new employees in the past few years and expanding into new product areas.

A small but growing number of people in the US are receiving messages from their doctors drafted with the help of artificial intelligence – and some may not even know it. It is the first step in a larger plan to use OpenAI's large language models – the line of technology powering chatbots such as ChatGPT – within one of the largest US electronic health records systems operated by the company Epic.

There's a chance that ChatGPT knows personal details about you--and if it doesn't, it might just make something up. As OpenAI's generative text chatbot has boomed in popularity over the past six months, the risks of the system being trained on data vacuumed up from the web have become clearer. Data regulators around the world are investigating issues with how OpenAI gathered the data it uses to train its large language models, the accuracy of answers it provides about people, and other legal concerns about the use of its generative text systems. Europe's data regulators have joined forces to look at OpenAI after Italy temporarily banned ChatGPT from the country. And Canada is also investigating the technology's potential privacy risks.