Even a cursory glance at the technology news each day will not miss the many concerns about the growing use of AI and the demands for tighter regulation. I would argue that this fuss is the same as people's reaction to video games 40 years ago.

As the Guardian reports, Clegg begins with a somewhat blinkered but accurate observation: "New technology always leads to hype. That's true. No company spends millions of dollars on R&D and then doesn't market it. [But, the former British deputy prime minister recalled further, "I remember the 80s. I remember the '80s. There was a moral panic about video games. There was a moral panic about radios, bicycles, and the Internet. I also remember the 1980s, but I don't remember many governments or organizations around the world screaming for video games to be regulated.

That's certainly true in the tabloid media and news channels, but Clegg seems to be missing the point a bit here. Video games were not something that would take thousands out of the workforce; 8-bit platformers were not used to deepfake celebrities into giving inflammatory opinions.

Punching pixelated characters in the face and blood splattering all over the TV is not much to worry about compared to the possibility of AI being used to manipulate and misinform people with biased and discriminatory information.

Clegg, apparently oblivious to the fact that he represents a company with a major interest in the world of AI, continued, "These predictions about what will happen next and what will happen in the immediate future are often not what those who are most familiar with it would have us believe."

Now, this is the precise and well-reasoned argument needed to reassure us. Because the word "often" is clearly synonymous with "never," and the meta clearly believes that all the current fuss is about random people screaming at the clouds in the sky.

After all, it's not as if AI can't make extremely bad taste polls appear in the press or falsely arrest people based on incorrect facial recognition. And that's before getting into the argument that the results of machine learning and AI training cannot possibly have racist or misogynistic results.

Fortunately, it appears that the authorities are not going to listen to Meta or other AI-focused companies. The U.S. government has already released a blueprint for a bill of rights that would allow people to benefit from how AI systems should be designed and implemented, not the other way around.

After all, it is far better to be vigilant and cautious with influential technologies like AI than to suffer the consequences of going bad with little to prevent that from happening.