The Freedom of Compute
The Future Landscape of Computation as a Fundamental Right
The debate surrounding Freedom of Compute, especially in the context of the burgeoning demands of artificial intelligence (AI), is poised to become a defining issue for society over the next two decades. As AI technologies become increasingly integral to every aspect of our lives—from healthcare and education to security and entertainment—the access to and control of computational resources emerges as a crucial battleground. This debate encapsulates fundamental questions about privacy, equity, national security, and the balance between innovation and regulation.
Why is Freedom of Compute a global issue?
The ability to access and utilize computational power not only dictates who can participate in the AI-driven economy but also who can influence the ethical and societal norms governing AI's development and use.
They say history is written by the victors, and in the case of AI, the country, or company, or potentially even the person whose AI becomes the unifying dominant AI, will actually own truth, history, and knowledge.
As nations grapple with these challenges, the policies and frameworks they establish will determine the global trajectory of technological advancement, potentially exacerbating or mitigating existing inequalities and setting the stage for future conflicts or collaborations. Thus, Freedom of Compute is not merely a technical issue but a societal imperative that will shape the contours of global power, governance, and human rights in the AI age.
Have we, humans, restricted innovations in the past?
Throughout history, particularly before the 1800s, technological advancements often faced restrictions or control by various authorities, driven by desires to maintain power, prevent social upheaval, or protect economic interests. Here are a few notable examples from this period:
These instances underscore how, prior to the 1800s, technological innovations were often met with resistance from authorities aiming to preserve their control over information, societal norms, and the status quo. From the printing press to the coffeehouse culture and astronomical advancements, the struggle between innovation and authority has been a recurring theme, reflecting the broader dynamics of power, knowledge, and societal change.
What are the arguments for restricting Freedom of Compute and why does the United State have the right to restrict it?
The United States has long envisioned itself as a bastion of democracy, freedom, and innovation, aiming to be the exemplar of a society where these values are in full bloom. This ambitious vision is the driving force behind its staunch commitment to preserving its "way of life," vigilantly guarding against any threats that could undermine its core principles. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) and the accessibility of advanced Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) have surfaced a plethora of concerns regarding their potential misuse by adversaries. These emerging threats not only pose significant risks to national security but also challenge the resilience of the societal norms and economic stability that underpin American life. The intersection of AI's potential with the strategic applications of advanced computing power underscores a critical juncture in the U.S.'s ongoing effort to navigate the dual-use nature of technological advancements.
The landscape of concerns is vast, ranging from national security threats, such as the potential for AI to revolutionize warfare with drones capable of autonomous operations, to economic espionage, where AI-driven tools might infiltrate digital networks to pilfer critical intellectual assets.
With AI, a single person could wield the destructive economic, social, and war power of an entire nation’s army — in a single click.
Examples abound, like the SolarWinds cyber breaches, highlighting the fragility of technological supremacy in the face of sophisticated espionage tactics. Similarly, the 2015 cyberattack on Ukraine's power grid reveals the vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure to AI-enhanced cyber warfare. Beyond infrastructure, the societal fabric faces threats from disinformation campaigns and privacy erosion, with AI's ability to generate deepfakes and power expansive surveillance networks, respectively, raising alarms over the erosion of public trust and individual privacy. Moreover, the potential destabilization of international norms through the unregulated development of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and the specter of an AI arms race underscore the urgent need for a global consensus on ethical AI use.
These multifaceted concerns illuminate the complex challenges posed by the proliferation of AI and advanced GPU technologies, signaling a pivotal moment for the United States. The country finds itself at a crossroads, seeking to balance the relentless pursuit of innovation with the imperative to safeguard against the myriad potential threats these technologies harbor. As the U.S. endeavors to protect its envisioned "way of life," the task ahead involves not only championing the values of democracy, freedom, and innovation but also leading the global dialogue on responsible AI development and use. This delicate balancing act is crucial not just for maintaining the U.S.'s stature as a beacon of democratic values but for shaping a future in which technological progress and societal well-being are inextricably linked, ensuring a legacy of positive impact on the world stage.
How does the United States enforce limitations on Freedom of Compute?
KYC (Know Your Customer)
Know Your Customer (KYC) regulations, as it pertains to renting GPUs on cloud platforms like AWS (Amazon Web Services), Google Cloud, or Microsoft Azure, are primarily defined and mandated by governmental bodies, not by cloud service providers or companies offering GPU resources.
Here’s how it works.
Identity Verification: Customers are required to provide personal information, such as name, address, and possibly government-issued identification (e.g., passport, driver's license). For businesses, this might include company registration details and tax identification numbers.
Purpose of Use: Customers may need to describe the intended use of the rented GPUs, especially if they're high-end models. This helps cloud providers ensure that the usage complies with legal and regulatory requirements, including export controls.
Compliance Checks: The cloud provider may perform checks against various databases to ensure the customer is not listed on any sanction lists, involved in illegal activities, or located in a country under export restrictions.
Approval Process: Once the necessary information is submitted and verified, the cloud provider reviews the application. This process can vary in length, typically ranging from a few hours to several days, depending on the complexity of the verification and the current workload of the provider's compliance team.
The Patriot Act
The Patriot Act, enacted in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, provides the U.S. government with expanded surveillance powers that, among other things, can indirectly impact access to high-end GPUs for computing AI training models or inferencing, especially for individuals, companies, or entities from certain countries. While the Act is primarily focused on enhancing national security measures and broadening the scope for monitoring and preventing terrorism-related activities, its provisions allow for a wider net of surveillance and checks on financial transactions and technology transfers that could potentially be used for purposes deemed contrary to U.S. interests.
This includes the scrutiny of transactions involving advanced technology exports, like high-end GPUs, which are critical for AI development.
Under the Patriot Act, agencies can gather and share information more freely about individuals or organizations, including those engaged in technology research and development, to ensure that such capabilities do not fall into the hands of entities that could use them in ways that threaten U.S. security.
This indirect consequence of the Patriot Act's surveillance capabilities underscores the U.S. government's commitment to leveraging its legal and regulatory frameworks to control the distribution of sensitive technologies on the grounds of national security, albeit raising debates about privacy and the global flow of technological resources.
Export Restrictions
Export restrictions imposed on leading technology firms, such as NVIDIA, serve as a strategic mechanism to control the dissemination of advanced GPUs to certain nations, thereby directly influencing the artificial intelligence capabilities of geopolitical adversaries.
While one might assume these constraints are targeted solely at nations like China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, the reality is far more encompassing. In fact, these restrictions apply globally, excluding only the United States, thereby granting the U.S. government significant leverage over computational freedom worldwide.
To export their high-end GPUs, companies like NVIDIA are required to secure a special license for each transaction, a process overseen by the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). The issuance of these licenses is subject to stringent scrutiny, with applications frequently rejected or subjected to in-depth review, particularly when the exports are suspected of aiding in military development, enhancing surveillance capabilities, or facilitating human rights violations.
The Argument for The Freedom of Compute
From the perspective of countries currently facing restrictions from the United States, the concept of Freedom of Compute is not only a fundamental right but a crucial driver of innovation, economic growth, and social progress.
These nations argue that the benefits of unrestricted access to advanced computing resources, such as AI development and GPU technologies, far outweigh the potential risks, advocating that such access can catalyze significant advancements in healthcare, education, and environmental protection.
They view the U.S. imposed limitations as a form of technological repression, an artificial barrier to the global flow of knowledge and resources that undermines the principles of a fair and interconnected global society. In their eyes, these restrictions serve to perpetuate a digital divide, stifling the potential for collective human advancement in favor of maintaining a status quo that privileges certain nations over others. By advocating for Freedom of Compute, these countries champion a vision of the future where technological empowerment is accessible to all, arguing that this is essential for fostering innovation, addressing global challenges, and achieving equitable progress in a truly global society.
The long term impacts of repressing Freedom of Compute
In the long term, countries where the United States restricts Freedom of Compute and AI access may face profound economic, social, and historical consequences. Economically, these restrictions can stifle innovation, slow growth, and widen the digital divide, leaving them trailing in the global race toward technological advancement. This technological gap could result in diminished competitiveness on the world stage, limiting their ability to attract investment and create high-value industries centered around emerging technologies. Socially, the impact could be equally profound, with reduced access to cutting-edge technologies potentially affecting healthcare, education, and public services, exacerbating inequalities within these societies. Furthermore, the narrative of their history and contributions to the global knowledge economy risks being marginalized or erased, as technological leadership shapes cultural and historical narratives. Over time, this could relegate these countries to peripheral roles in the world order, their voices and experiences overshadowed by those of technologically dominant nations.
Restricting access to compute power and AI could create war instead of preventing it.
As the digital divide deepens, it could lead to growing dissatisfaction, resentment, and tension among nations and peoples who perceive themselves as unfairly disadvantaged in the global knowledge economy. This scenario underscores the potential for such technological disparities to not merely influence economic outcomes but to also fuel geopolitical instability and conflict, challenging the very fabric of international cooperation and peace.
The long-term consequence is a world potentially bifurcated not just by wealth and power, but by knowledge and innovation capacity, where the rich tapestry of global contributions to science and technology becomes narrower, dominated by those with unrestricted access to computational resources.
The long term benefits of supporting Freedom of Compute
The principle of Freedom of Compute, when embraced globally, presents an opportunity to weave a tapestry of unity and collaboration across nations, using AI and technology as tools for shared human advancement. This vision of technological equity demonstrates how access to computational resources can be a pivotal force in addressing universal challenges, with each example shedding light on specific national contexts:
Universal Education: In rural Indonesia, where geographical isolation hampers educational access, platforms like Khan Academy and Coursera could offer remote villages the chance to bridge educational gaps, empowering students with global knowledge right from their local classrooms.
Global Healthcare Improvements: In sub-Saharan Africa, where there's a dire shortage of medical specialists, AI-driven portable diagnostic devices could revolutionize healthcare delivery, making early detection and treatment of diseases like malaria and tuberculosis a reachable goal for remote communities.
Agricultural Revolution: In India, facing the challenge of feeding a burgeoning population with limited arable land, satellite imagery and AI could guide farmers in Andhra Pradesh to optimize crop yields, reduce waste, and ensure food security through precision farming techniques.
Economic Inclusivity: For artisans in the Peruvian Andes, e-commerce platforms can open up global markets for their traditional crafts, transforming local economies and preserving cultural heritage by connecting them directly with consumers around the world.
Environmental Stewardship: In the Brazilian Amazon, where deforestation threatens biodiversity, advanced monitoring technologies can empower local and global conservation efforts, providing actionable data to combat illegal logging and protect one of the earth's most vital lungs.
Disaster Preparedness and Relief: For the Philippines, regularly battered by typhoons, computational models predicting natural disasters could significantly enhance preparedness and response strategies, saving lives and reducing economic losses through timely evacuations and resource allocations.
Pandemic Management: In densely populated Bangladesh, AI's role in public health surveillance could offer a crucial advantage in early detection and containment of disease outbreaks, minimizing spread and impact through strategic public health interventions.
Sustainable Energy Solutions: For island nations like Fiji, facing the dual challenges of energy dependence and climate change, optimizing renewable energy sources through computational models can lead to sustainable energy independence, protecting their environment and economy.
Financial Empowerment: In Kenya, mobile banking and digital financial services have already transformed the economy by providing widespread access to financial services, illustrating how such tools can uplift entire communities by offering security and prosperity through innovation.
Enhanced Governance and Civic Participation: In Tunisia, transitioning to democracy, digital platforms can foster civic engagement, offering citizens a voice in governance and policy-making, thus strengthening the foundations of their nascent democracy and setting a precedent for participatory governance.
These examples illuminate the transformative potential of Freedom of Compute to not just address but transcend the specific challenges faced by nations around the globe. By championing equitable access to these technological tools, we can collectively forge a future where every country benefits from the promise of AI and technology, crafting a narrative of shared progress and mutual prosperity.
We are only at the beginning of this debate.
While these reasons are grounded in legitimate concerns for national security, economic stability, and ethical standards, the debate becomes increasingly complex within a global society where technological advancement is deeply interconnected. The potential benefits of a more open approach to computational resources—a boost in global innovation, enhanced collaboration on pressing worldwide issues like climate change and health crises, and the democratization of AI technology for developing nations—must also be carefully weighed. The challenge lies in balancing these valid security and competitive interests of the U.S. with the broader implications for international equity, access to technology, and the collective progress of humanity.
This delicate equilibrium highlights the ongoing dialogue necessary to navigate the future of AI and computational power on a global scale, advocating for policies that promote both innovation and responsibility.
Who am I?
I'm Steve Newcomb. Functionally, I’m perhaps most recognized for founding Powerset— it was the largest AI and machine learning project in the world when I founded it. It was later acquired by Microsoft and transformed into something you might recognize today - Microsoft Bing. Beyond Bing, I had the privilege of being on the pioneering team that witnessed the inaugural email sent via a mobile device. My journey also led me to SRI (Stanford Research Institute), where we laid the groundwork for contemporary speech recognition technology. Additionally, I was a co-founder of the debut company to introduce a 3D physics engine in Javascript. I've held positions on the board of directors and contributed funding to massive open source initiatives like NodeJS and even the largest such project, jQuery. My experience extends to academia, having been a senior fellow at the University of California, Berkeley's engineering and business faculties. Recently, I ventured into Layer 2 internet protocols and assisted a company named Matter Labs in securing $440 million in funding to bolster their endeavors.
What am I doing besides writing these posts?
Typically, I allocate a year between groundbreaking ventures. My exploration for the upcoming project commenced in May 2023, and the sole certainty is its nexus with the film, television, SMURF, and AI domains. Sharing insights on my research endeavors helps me discern between feasible prospects and mere illusions. My hope is that for this venture, I appropriately consider the ethical and sociological repercussions.
If you are interested in contacting me, being interviewed, being helped, or yelling at me, my email is steve.e.newcomb@gmail.com.
You'll find some interesting news at the X-Twitter account @RightToCompute