Recent policy proposals aim to improve the safety of general-purpose AI, but there is little understanding of the efficacy of different regulatory approaches to AI safety. We present a strategic model that explores the interactions between the regulator, the general-purpose AI technology creators, and domain specialists--those who adapt the AI for specific applications. Our analysis examines how different regulatory measures, targeting different parts of the development chain, affect the outcome of the development process. In particular, we assume AI technology is described by two key attributes: safety and performance. The regulator first sets a minimum safety standard that applies to one or both players, with strict penalties for non-compliance. The general-purpose creator then develops the technology, establishing its initial safety and performance levels. Next, domain specialists refine the AI for their specific use cases, and the resulting revenue is distributed between the specialist and generalist through an ex-ante bargaining process. Our analysis of this game reveals two key insights: First, weak safety regulation imposed only on the domain specialists can backfire. While it might seem logical to regulate use cases (as opposed to the general-purpose technology), our analysis shows that weak regulations targeting domain specialists alone can unintentionally reduce safety. This effect persists across a wide range of settings. Second, in sharp contrast to the previous finding, we observe that stronger, well-placed regulation can in fact benefit all players subjected to it. When regulators impose appropriate safety standards on both AI creators and domain specialists, the regulation functions as a commitment mechanism, leading to safety and performance gains, surpassing what is achieved under no regulation or regulating one player only.

Artificial intelligence is poised to deliver tremendous benefits to society. But, as many have pointed out, it could also bring unprecedented new horrors. As a general-purpose technology, the same tools that will advance scientific discovery could also be used to develop cyber, chemical, or biological weapons. Governing AI will require widely sharing its benefits while keeping the most powerful AI out of the hands of bad actors. The good news is that there is already a template on how to do just that.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is both omnipresent and conceptually slippery, making it notoriously hard to regulate. Fortunately for the rest of the world, two major experiments in the design of AI governance are currently playing out in Europe and China. The European Union (EU) is racing to pass its draft Artificial Intelligence Act, a sweeping piece of legislation intended to govern nearly all uses of AI. Meanwhile, China is rolling out a series of regulations targeting specific types of algorithms and AI capabilities. For the host of countries starting their own AI governance initiatives, learning from the successes and failures of these two initial efforts to govern AI will be crucial.

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies has already transformed business operations across the globe. From customer service chat-bots to adaptive cybersecurity, the applications of AI are nearly limitless. When properly designed, AI can help minimize paperwork, reduce costs, and drive better business decisions by increasing the predictive accuracy of future outcomes and mitigating the cognitive biases inherent in human decision making. In the financial services industry, AI has the potential to expand access to affordable credit for consumers and small businesses and combat fraud and financial crimes, but many financial institutions remain reluctant to deploy AI to its maximum potential without clear guidance from US regulatory agencies. Like many new technologies, the current AI landscape lacks a depth of established legal and regulatory precedent to rely on.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a fascinating technological development that is significantly impacting our present-day lives. Given AI's potential, there is a need to carefully examine what is being entrusted to the AI system and to build mechanisms to obtain the advantages of AI and to avoid its disadvantages. AI is a potent digital computational reality and even though AI-driven applications are widespread, still there seems to be limited appreciation of the role AI is playing in our lives. However, recent technological advances in designing self-driving vehicles have helped focus attention on AI and have helped people better understand the powerful potential of AI. The prospect of safe self-driving or autonomous vehicles is quite amazing, and this possibility has justifiably attracted much attention.

Artificial intelligence has been on Washington's radar for decades, at least conceptionally. More concretely, over the past few years the federal government has sought to keep up with the dizzying pace of advances by Big Tech and any number of smaller startups – not to mention international competitors, most notably China. Congress and the executive branch – including the White House and a wide range of federal agencies in both the national security and civilian economy spheres – have increasingly supported direct investments, promoted incentives for stepped-up R&D, and worked to develop non-regulatory guidance for the public and private sectors in navigating the economic, technological and social implications of AI. Seeking to ensure a leading global role for the US in AI development and implementation is a prime motivator for American policymakers. In doing so, Washington has been reluctant to adopt or even propose an EU-style sweeping regulatory regime governing applications and oversight of AI for fear that it may slow innovation.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to upend nearly every industry. It's a technology that will deliver astronomical gains in productivity, dramatic cost reductions, and tremendous advances in research and development. With AI set to increase global GDP by more than $15.7 trillion by 2030, it can be easy to assume that the technology can be nothing but an unfettered good. That would be a dangerous mistake. AI, like any technology, can have detrimental personal, societal, and economic effects: some common concerns include the fact it provides tools that can be exploited by criminals to compromise the cyber security of individuals and organisations, or that the predictive abilities of AI raise a swathe of privacy concerns.