The Bureau of Industry and Security, in a proposed regulation, announced on November 19, decided to establish guidelines that regulate "the criteria for identifying emerging technologies that are essential for the national security of the United States". The goals are linked to both security and protectionism of American industry, particularly in the science, technology, engineering and manufacturing sectors.
The proposed rules include 14 technologies, which cover brain-computer interfaces with advanced surveillance technologies. This list of technologies also includes "artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning technology", which is further divided into 11 related tools.
Below is a list of all types of AI that the new rules try to put under export and trade controls:
- Neural networks and in-depth learning (eg brain modeling, time series forecasting, classification)
- Evolution and genetic calculation (eg genetic algorithms, genetic programming)
- Strengthening teaching
- Computer vision (eg Recognition of objects, image comprehension)
- Expert systems (eg Decision support systems, teaching systems)
- Speech and audio processing (eg Speech recognition and production)
- Processing of natural language (eg, automatic translation)
- Planning (eg Programming, Game)
- Audio and video manipulation technologies (eg Voice cloning, deepfakes)
- AI cloud technologies
- AI chipset
Many of these are mathematical concepts or processes, as they are distinct and controllable technologies. Others, like AI's cloud technologies, suggest servers that are always online, which are difficult to control within the boundaries due to the nature of the Internet.
Addressing the problems associated with the entire technological field is a complicated challenge, even in cases where technology is defined.
The White House has decided to move into emerging technologies
"This new approach of the US administration must be seen as a short-term strategy to implement countermeasures to the threat of China, seen as an emerging center in technological innovation," said Elsa B. Kania, at the Center for New American Security.
"However, overhauling this traditional mechanism, due to today's challenges, is inherently difficult, particularly when development is driven by commercial technologies."
Unlike, for example, the control of components and missile projects during the Cold War, many of the technologies covered by these proposed rules have both commercial and military applications. We do not need to look abroad to try it. For example, the Project Maven, the tool created by Google to process images collected by drones, was built on an open-source library. Identifying objects in images is certainly not a specific military task.
Companies in the United States should be limited in the way they create, sell and share those same tools with researchers and commercial companies outside US borders.
"The Chinese national strategy of military-civil fusion, which seeks to create and exploit the synergies between defense, academic and commercial technological developments in dual-use technologies, increases the ambiguity and uncertainty of technology transfer and collaboration" , said Kania. That is, the boundaries between defense and commercial technologies can become quite confusing due to the nature of these technologies and the Chinese government's strategy for their integrated development. "
Implementing controls to hinder the free flow of AI between US companies and businesses abroad could somehow mitigate that risk, but countries wishing to acquire tools can pursue research by other means, including technology transfers, espionage, theft through hacking or even simple investment and acquisition. Keeping up with artificial intelligence probably can not be done only through trade restrictions.
"The United States must recognize that such controls can slow and hinder China's progress in these emerging technologies, but the emergence of China as a potential power and potential superpower in such emerging technologies will remain a long-term challenge," Kania said. "We must not only pursue these defensive countermeasures, but also adopt a more offensive approach to ensure future American competitiveness by investing in our innovation system".