[flagged]
You post your blog (subtle advertising) then vehemently attack anyone who dares to disagree?
Not cool.
There's no equivalent for AI research, and a lot of temptation to try and find simple metrics which mean safe - and it's appealing. Water should be below X ppm contaminant is "easy" to establish. AI should be <blank> to be safe?
Exactly. I gave examples of actual tech projects undertaken by governments, so an abstract discussion of "government vs. private industry" is not really on point here.
Oh, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_privatization#Prevalence
But, hey, never let facts interfere with your deeply held religious beliefs, eh?
EDITED: to make the point - please don't assume everyone here lives in the US.
The "bipartisan coalition" in the Senate is determined to spend $32 billion (just a downpayment, for sure) is not planning to do what you want. They want to hand out money to a lot of universities, NGO's, and bureaucrats. In your terms, they want to deliver the clean water.
A "regulatory framework" would be something like the Dodd-Frank bill, or Sarbanes-Oxley. Maybe that's what you want, but it's not what Schumer is pushing.
I think there's also a place for government to perhaps 'accelerate' the market to encourage certain behaviours by either creating financial incentives/disincentives. This can be in the form of grants etc. In that case, giving money to researchers in the domain would make sense - on the basis that they are more likely to understand what's technically required than a government public servant.
And to your point regarding beauracrats: someone has to manage and oversee regulatory frameworks. Voluntary frameworks with no oversight at all are a figleaf. We can argue about the number/cost but we shouldn't be arguing about the need, assuming we agree on the need for regulatory frameworks in the first place.
As a real example, fully autonomous weapons will be developed and used. And if you don't want them to exist outside of black markets and pariah states, governments need to agree that development, manufacture and sale of them is a crime, like chemical weapons and land mines. Yes, I didn't say it would work well, but it is still the best tool we have.
those would be a matter of an international treaty, like chemical weapons and land mines. None of that is covered in Schumer's $32 billion.