*@Scott th Ratbag -- see at bottom, a bit for you personally
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, whilst Labor might be failing in many areas, same areas all have failed for half a century or so and whilst they might not be able to do things for many crises -
they do have some thinking which looks rock solid and common sense - and it's coming from Jim Chambers.
And this may well be a big thing. Chambers may well be setting the architecture here for decades to come.
Jim Chalmers treads middle path between unions and business on artificial intelligence
''
If the treasurer's reform roundtable kicking off in two weeks achieves nothing else, it has at least sharpened a long overdue debate about what role government should play in setting the rules of the road for AI.
This technology is already upon us.
.................
At one end of the spectrum sits the ACTU, which wants a national artificial intelligence act, and a new national AI authority to oversee "mandatory enforceable agreements" in every workplace, to ensure staff are consulted before technology is rolled out.
At the other end of the spectrum, business groups and the Productivity Commission want as little additional regulation as possible. They argue existing rules are enough and don't want to slow down a technology viewed as crucial for Australia's future success.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers is pitching himself as something of a Goldilocks on this. He says he wants to find the right balance "between over-regulating and under-regulating".
This "sensible middle path", as Chalmers calls it, charts a course on AI regulation between those who want to "let it rip" and those who want to "pull the doona over the head".
And that's, although what one would think obvious - one of the best political responses I've seen from most governments - it is pure, common sense.
The Brotherhood of St. Laurence, a social justice organisation that provides aged care, disability and other community services, recently ran an eight-week trial of an AI tool. The results were overwhelmingly positive. Staff involved found AI saved them about an hour a day, which could then be spent focusing more on teams and participants. The technology also improved accessibility for staff with language barriers or neurodiversity.
