Training these models is costly. It only makes sense to train them if you get a significant commercial benefit. A significant commercial benefit almost by definition will have trouble hiding from regulators.

Another point is that even if regulation is imperfect, it creates regulatory uncertainty which is likely to discourage investment and delay progress.

Nah. Uncertain regulations aren't allowed under US law. And costs are dropping every year.

>Uncertain regulations aren't allowed under US law

Uh, I'm fairly sure that's false? What law are you referring to?

As an example of what I'm saying, antitrust regulation is uncertain in the sense that we don't always know when a merger will be blocked or a big company will be broken up by regulators.

I'm referring to the vagueness doctrine.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/vagueness_doctrine

Maybe next time do some basic legal research before making ridiculous suggestions.

It looks like this is for criminal law. Would changes to the tax code for companies which deploy AI be affected by this doctrine? Can you show me a specific example of an overly vague tax code being struck down on the basis of the vagueness doctrine?

Do you think the GDPR would be unenforceable due to the vagueness doctrine if it was copy/pasted into a US context?

BTW, even if a regulation is absolutely precise, it still creates "regulatory uncertainty" in the sense that investors may be reluctant to invest due to the possibility of further regulations.