What will the candidates say about AI in tonight’s debate?
We recorded 8 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 5 can’t be checked. 1 more is held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (8)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“But what you should really be watching for are the candidate’s comments on AI, which after all, is likely to change the world in coming years, affecting virtually every aspect of society, from employment to education to healthcare to national defense.”
What we tested: AI is likely to change the world in coming years, affecting virtually every aspect of society including employment, education, healthcare and national defense.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“You should be watching to see what the candidates plan to do about fraud and disinformation, as AI contributes to escalation in both.”
What we tested: AI is contributing to an escalation in fraud and disinformation.
What happened: This primary agency release connects AI to greater attack scale and describes increasing use of cloned voices and videos to induce fraudulent transactions. It provides a mechanism and an operational assessment, but no estimate of AI-attributable losses. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, San Francisco, )
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“And how the candidates plan to deal with a likely rise in market manipulation using AI-generated misinformation.”
What we tested: Market manipulation using AI-generated misinformation is likely to rise.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“And you should be watching to see what they plan to do about the growing problem of nonconsensual deep fake porn, and especially how that might affect the already vulnerable population of teenage girls, who have been hard by social media.”
What we tested: Nonconsensual deepfake porn is a growing problem.
What happened: The Korean passage says the threat from sexual deepfakes of acquaintances and celebrities is substantially increasing. The accompanying police series records 297 cases through July 2024, compared with 180 in all of 2023, directly supporting growth in recorded cases. (Korean National Police Agency; copy hosted by the National Youth Policy Institute, )
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“In an ideal world, both candidates would come clean on their policies around AI, and we should come away with a clear understanding of their understanding of our future. In an ideal world, moderators would demand such clarity.”
What we tested: Presidential candidates should state their AI policies clearly and debate moderators should demand that clarity.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“With so much at stake, a total neglect of AI policy would be deeply unfortunate. Our long-term future may actually be shaped more by AI policy than tariffs.”
What we tested: AI policy may shape our long-term future more than tariff policy will.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“It would be a really good time to demand better. If we don’t, future generations may regret it.”
What we tested: Citizens should now demand better from candidates on AI policy, or future generations may regret it.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Because the candidates – in the House, the Senate, and for President – certainly aren’t going to bother to talk about AI policy if we don’t let them know that it matters, to all of us.”
What we tested: If citizens don't make clear that AI policy matters, candidates for the House, Senate, and President will not talk about it.
Held from this post (1)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: Neither candidate is likely to say much about AI in the 10 September 2024 debate, and it is even less likely that either will commit to mitigating AI's harms.