What's the point of these letters? Everyone knows this is rent-seeking behavior by OpenAI, and they're going to pay off the right politicians to get it passed.
Dear Senator [X],
It's painfully obvious that Sam Altman's testimony before the judiciary committee is an attempt to set up rent-seeking conditions for OpenAI, and to snuff out competition from the flourishing open source AI community.
We will be carefully monitoring your campaign finances for evidence of bribery.
I have sent correspondence about ten times to my Congressmen and Senators. I have received a good reply (although often just saying there is nothing that they can do) except for the one time I contacted Jon Kyl and unfortunately mentioned data about his campaign donations from Monsanto - I was writing about a bill he sponsored that I thought would have made it difficult for small farmers to survive economically and make community gardens difficult because of regulations. No response on that correspondence.
Well, it's not like getting a response means anything anyway. The contents of the response has no correlation with their future behavior.
Politicians just know that it's better to be nice to people who seem to like you or are engaged with the system, since they want to keep getting your vote. If not then the person isn't worth your time.
Right so the most effective way to influence your politician is to disrupt their life, because they belittle their constituents' existence every day, by completely ignoring them and often working directly against their interests, unless they can further their own political goals.
In places like the usa I don't think politicians should expect privacy or peace. They have so much power compared to the citizen and they so rarely further the interests of the general population in good faith.
Given how they treat you, it's best to abandon politeness (which only helps them further belittle your meaninglessness in their decision making) and put a crowd in front of their house, accost them at restaurants, and find other ways of reminding them how accessible and functionally answerable they are to the people they're supposed to serve.
In Pakistan, there was a provincial politician (Zulfiqar Mirza) who’s probably killed more than one person, who has been seen on TV going to police and bureaucrats saying “I’m a villain and you know it”
I'm 99% sure that that vast majority of federal congress people (which represent ~1 million people each) never see your emails/letters. Your largely speaking to interns/etc who work in the office unless you happen to make a physical appointment and show up in person.
Those interns have a pile of form letters they send for about 99% of (e)mail they get, and if you happen to catch their attention you might get more than than the usual tick mark in a spreadsheet (for/against X). Which at best might be as much as a sentence or two in a weekly correspondence summary which may/may not be read by your representative depending on how seriously they take their job.
The way is not emails some office assistant deletes when they do not align with the already chosen path forward they just need Cherry picked support to leverage to manufacture consent
Did you watch the hearing? He specifically said that licensing wouldn’t be for the smaller places and didn’t want to impede their progress. The pitfalls of consolidation and regulatory capture also came up.
>>He specifically said that licensing wouldn’t be for the smaller places
This is not a rebuttle to regulatory capture. it is in fact built into the model
These "small companies" are feeder systems for the large company, it is a place for companies to raise to the level where they would come under the burden of regulations, and prevented from growing larger there by making them very easy to acquire by the large company.
The small company has to sell or raise massive amounts of capital to just piss away on compliance cost. Most will just sell
The genie is out of the bottle. The barriers to entry are too low, and the research can be done in parts of the word that don't give $0.02 what the US Congress thinks about it.
Dear Senator [X],
It's painfully obvious that Sam Altman's testimony before the judiciary committee is an attempt to set up rent-seeking conditions for OpenAI, and to snuff out competition from the flourishing open source AI community.
We will be carefully monitoring your campaign finances for evidence of bribery.
Hugs and Kiss,
[My Name]