Outrage over AI is pointless if we're clueless about bots

Much of the commentary on artificial intelligence (AI) comes from well-meaning voices, including those who see themselves as constructive partners in policy formulation.

- SRINATH SRIDHARAN

They speak earnestly, frame their concerns carefully, and sometimes sound persuasive. Yet, too often, they stop short of confronting the hard questions. It is easier to talk about a single high-profile lapse than to ask why such failures recur and what that reveals about the design of this technology and the challenge of governing it.

Take the case of xAI's Grok chatbot, which recently hit the news for generating deeply offensive and antisemitic output. As expected, the firm issued an apology and pledged reforms. Such gestures have become a ritual across the AI industry. The immediate response to the latest scandal was a chorus demanding fines, tougher deterrents, and stricter oversight. All of these are understandable and even justified. Yet, they risk treating symptoms while leaving the underlying ailment untouched.

What is frequently missed is that artificial intelligence remains an evolving field. The models drawing alarm are built through rapid iterations, with techniques, safeguards, and deployment strategies shifting almost as quickly as they appear.

Historically, regulation has always trailed innovation. From early aviation to financial derivatives and digital privacy, lawmakers have struggled to keep pace with the speed and complexity of any evolving technology. It is wishful to assume AI would be any different. Recent debates over water-marking, alignment methods, and open-source risks show that even within the field, consensus is elusive and best practices are in flux.