Actual workers should outnumber "governance" bureaucrats by 100:1
pmoorcraft•46m ago
Eventually they will. But whilst we adapt, it should be low
anuramat•42m ago
why?
pmoorcraft•37m ago
Because there are no widely agreed upon standards for AI use. The EU AI Act still doesn't really solve this. Until we can all agree what safe and fair AI use is, companies will scramble to implement their own safeguards
kubelsmieci•7m ago
Who are these "we"?
anuramat•43m ago
the article implies that the perfect balance is 1:1; I want to believe this is just some sort of a ragebait-based PR strategy
_vertigo•43m ago
Great, a totally vibe-coded website with a slop “analysis” about AI touting a meaningless ratio with zero context
goldenarm•41m ago
The regulations are not meant to be productive, they are meant to reduce negative externalities.
It's like minimizing the cop-to-criminal ratio. Sure it would save money, but would society come out improved ?
shaftoe•40m ago
What the heck is an AI governance role that would remotely require these kinds of ratios? PCI compliance is critical in payments and no one would suggest you need "PCI governance" in a single digit ratio to "builders".
causality0•35m ago
I maintain my position that "being really, really stupid" should be added to the Guidelines for post flagging.
AlanYx•23m ago
I disagree with this being flagged. I'd be interested in seeing more data of this type, despite how "preposterous" it is from a tech perspective. I've long speculated that in Canada we're at about a 3:1 ratio for builders to AI regulators if you include government and NGOs, and the numbers in this link from Ireland are not far off that (and this link excludes government and NGO regulatory hires).
It's clear that outside of the US, there is an atypically large regulatory complex building compared to actual implementors.
consensus1•52m ago
pmoorcraft•46m ago
anuramat•42m ago
pmoorcraft•37m ago
kubelsmieci•7m ago
anuramat•43m ago