From Indiana to Idaho, a Backlash Against A.I. Gathers Momentum

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.Luke Sharrett for The New York TimesFrom Indiana to Idaho, a Backlash Against A.I. Gathers Momentum By Tripp MickleWhen Michael Grayston, an evangelical pastor in Austin, Texas, heard that a friend’s relationship with an artificial intelligence companion had nearly destroyed a marriage, he saw a moral danger that needed to be addressed.When Jack Gardner, a Boise, Idaho musician, discovered A.I. had made songs with copyrighted music, he and his wife, Cathryn, an elementary school band teacher, started a local group to call for A.I. legislation.And when Bart and Amy Snyder, farmers in Wolcott, Ind., learned that a data center was going to be built 300 yards from their home, they worried it would drain local aquifers and started a campaign to unseat three county officials who had supported it.Supported bySKIP ADVERTISEMENTFrom Indiana to Idaho, a Backlash Against A.I. Gathers MomentumThough none of them had been politically active before, they became part of a growing national movement that pits the tech industry and its billionaires against a diverse coalition of parent groups, religious leaders, environmentalists and former Tea Party activists. Politically they range from the populist firebrand Stephen K. Bannon to Bernie Sanders, the progressive senator from Vermont.The reasons they are pushing back against the technology are as varied as their backgrounds. But they all worry that tech companies are more focused on cashing in on A.I. than how it may affect regular people. They also share a sense that all that money will flow into the hands of Silicon Valley’s ultrawealthy, while the middle and working classes shoulder the costs.Many of these A.I. critics say they are far from being Luddites just having a bad reaction to new, scary technology. They believe that people in Washington, especially President Trump, are protecting Silicon Valley rather than reeling it in. They want regulation — or at least a debate before A.I. becomes entrenched in American life.“Given A.I. and robotics are going to impact every man, woman and child in this country, one might think that there’d be a massive debate in the United States Congress: What does it mean? Where do we go? How do we deal with it?” Mr. Sanders said in an interview with The New York Times. “There has been minimal, minimal discussion.”A White House spokesman, Davis Ingle, said in a statement that “it is the policy of the Trump administration to sustain American A.I. dominance to protect our national security and ensure we remain the world’s leading economy.”The White House’s policy framework for A.I., which was issued last month, calls on A.I. services to protect children. This year, Mr. Trump also issued a proclamation that said tech companies “must pay for the full cost of the energy and infrastructure needed to build and operate data centers.” window.registerInteractive && window.registerInteractive("100000010865299"); div:has(+ time) { display: none } .nytapp-hybrid-article h1 + div { display: none } section h1:first-of-type, article h1:first-of-type { display: none; } header { display: none; } section[name="articleBody"] p:first-of-type a { text-decoration: none; } .nytapp-hybrid-article h1:first-of-type + div > p:first-of-type a { text-decoration: none; } p.scrolly-text-0 { font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1.5625rem; font-family: nyt-imperial,…

This excerpt is published under fair use for community discussion. Read the full article at NYT > Top Stories.