data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cb584/cb5841f5f2fa9acde8f0a059dc94c0925f3df8d1" alt="Alarming Cuts Threaten US AI Safety Institute: A Setback for Regulation?"
The world of artificial intelligence is advancing at breakneck speed, and the need for robust safety measures and ethical guidelines is more critical than ever. But what happens when the very institutions designed to safeguard AI are facing the chopping block? News has emerged that the US AI Safety Institute (AISI), a crucial body within the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is facing potentially devastating budget cuts. This development sends shockwaves through the tech community, raising serious questions about the future of AI regulation and safety in the United States. Why the Concern Over US AI Safety Institute Cuts? Imagine building a super-fast car without brakes. That’s essentially what unchecked AI development could become. The AISI was established to be the ‘brake’ – the organization studying potential AI risks and setting crucial safety standards. Created just last year under a previous presidential executive order, its mission is to ensure that AI development proceeds responsibly. However, recent reports paint a grim picture: Massive Layoffs Looming: Axios and Bloomberg reports indicate that NIST, the parent organization of AISI, is planning significant layoffs, potentially affecting up to 500 staffers. These cuts are expected to heavily impact probationary employees, many of whom are likely working within the AISI and Chips for America initiatives. AISI ‘Gutted’: Sources suggest that the US AI Safety Institute is being specifically targeted and could be “gutted” by these layoffs. This means a significant reduction in personnel and resources dedicated to AI safety research and development. Leadership Vacuum: Adding to the turmoil, AISI’s director recently departed in February. This leadership gap, combined with potential staff reductions, creates a perfect storm of instability for the fledgling organization. Policy Reversal: The executive order that initially established AISI was repealed by the current administration, casting further doubt on the institute’s long-term viability and political backing. These potential AI Safety Institute cuts are not just numbers on a spreadsheet; they represent a tangible threat to the nation’s capacity to navigate the complex landscape of AI safety. Expert Voices Raise the Alarm on AI Regulation Impact The news of potential layoffs has been met with widespread criticism from AI safety and policy experts. Jason Green-Lowe, executive director of the Center for AI Policy, voiced serious concerns, stating that these cuts would “severely impact the government’s capacity to research and address critical AI safety concerns.” His sentiment is echoed across the AI safety community. Cutting resources from AISI now is seen as incredibly short-sighted, especially when: AI Risks are Escalating: As AI models become more powerful and integrated into various aspects of life, the potential risks – from bias and misuse to unforeseen consequences – are also growing. Global Race in AI: Nations worldwide are investing heavily in AI research and development. Weakening the US’s AI safety infrastructure could put the country at a disadvantage in the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies. Need for Standards: AISI’s role in developing standards and best practices for AI is crucial for ensuring interoperability, safety, and ethical considerations are built into AI systems from the ground up. Reduced capacity in this area could lead to fragmented and potentially unsafe AI development. The Broader Implications of NIST Layoffs for AI and Tech While the focus is on the US AI Safety Institute , the reported NIST layoffs AI extend beyond just this single organization. NIST plays a vital role in numerous sectors, including technology, manufacturing, and cybersecurity. Cuts of this magnitude could have ripple effects across various critical areas: NIST Area Potential Impact of Cuts AI Safety Research Slowdown in research, reduced capacity to identify and mitigate AI risks. Chips for America Potential delays or scaling back of initiatives to boost domestic semiconductor manufacturing. Technology Standards Development Slower development of crucial technology standards, impacting innovation and interoperability. Cybersecurity Weakened cybersecurity research and standards, potentially increasing vulnerability to cyber threats. These potential cuts raise serious questions about the direction of Government AI safety policy and the prioritization of technological safety and regulation in the current political climate. Are we sacrificing long-term safety and responsible innovation for short-term budget savings? Navigating the Uncertain Future of AI Safety The situation surrounding the US AI Safety Institute is fluid and concerning. While the reports of layoffs are still developing, the potential consequences for AI safety and regulation are significant. It underscores the ongoing tension between fostering innovation and ensuring responsible technological development. For those in the cryptocurrency and blockchain space, the implications are also relevant. AI is increasingly intertwined with blockchain technology, from enhancing security and efficiency to powering new decentralized applications. A robust and well-regulated AI ecosystem is essential for the continued growth and trust in decentralized technologies. The coming weeks will be crucial in determining the extent of these cuts and their lasting impact on the AI regulation impact and the future of AI safety in the US. Staying informed and advocating for responsible AI development is more important than ever. To learn more about the latest AI market trends, explore our articles on key developments shaping AI features.
Bitcoin World
You can visit the page to read the article.
Source: Bitcoin World
Disclaimer: The opinion expressed here is not investment advice – it is provided for informational purposes only. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of BitMaden. Every investment and all trading involves risk, so you should always perform your own research prior to making decisions. We do not recommend investing money you cannot afford to lose.
Market Insights: What Lies Ahead for Bitcoin, Ether, and PEPE Coin?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7d1a7/7d1a785db3e3c3dd04f5abff1649e4f9c2428f8e" alt="BTC struggles after a significant hack and market turmoil. Ether and PEPE Coin show potential for recovery despite challenges. Continue Reading: Market Insights: What Lies Ahead for Bitcoin, Ether, and PEPE Coin? The post Market Insights: What Lies Ahead for Bitcoin, Ether, and PEPE Coin? appeared first on COINTURK NEWS ."
BTC struggles after a significant hack and market turmoil. Ether and PEPE Coin show potential for recovery despite challenges. Continue Reading: Market Insights: What Lies Ahead for Bitcoin, Ether, and PEPE Coin? The post Market Insights: What Lies Ahead for Bitcoin, Ether, and PEPE Coin? appeared first on COINTURK NEWS . Bitcoin World
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/527c9/527c9cbc2b7dad2b510995d34472e4eb9d7dbb01" alt="With not all information public, Arkham Intelligence, a blockchain analysis firm, has concluded that North Korea’s Lazarus group was responsible for the $1.46 billion hack on the Bybit exchange. On platform X, Arkham offered a bounty of 50,000 ARKM tokens, worth around $30,000, for anyone who could identify the attackers responsible for Friday’s hack. Not long after, Arkham announced that freelancer ZachXBT had provided “definite proof” that the North Korean hacking group was behind the hack. According to current information, Lazarus, North Korea’s elite state-sponsored hacking group, pulled off the largest hack in history on a centralized crypto exchange. The hack resulted in the withdrawal of Ethereum tokens amounting to around $1.5 billion. Ethereum security researchers are scrambling to investigate the incident to understand how the attack happened and whether the hack may spread to other exchanges. Within days, crypto enthusiast ZachXBT identified the Lazarus group as the likely culprit. Lazarus has been responsible for many of the top attacks on digital assets. Blockchain firm Nansen revealed that the attackers first withdrew the funds into a single wallet and then distributed them to multiple wallets. “Initially, the stolen funds were transferred to a primary wallet, which then distributed them across more than 40 wallets”, Nansen said. “The attackers converted all stETH, cmETH, and mETH to ETH before systematically transferring ETH in $27 million increments to over 10 additional wallets”. Ben Zhou, Bybit CEO, urged customers to remain calm and assured them that 80% of funds were recovered by using bridge loans to replace the stolen money. Despite the current bank run on Bybit, Zhou assured users that withdrawals would not be blocked and that customers would have access to their funds. Leveraging bridge loans allows Zhou to honour withdrawal requests. At this stage, the return of stolen tokens is highly unlikely. ZachXBT has yet to release all data pointing to the Lazarus group. He says his analysis involved tracking online connections between wallet addresses until, with the assistance of a colleague, he was able to narrow down the suspects to the North Korean hacking group. ZachXBT found a connection between the wallets used in the Bybit hack and the wallets used in the $85 million hack of Singapore-based exchange Phemex. At this stage, at least, the attack appears to be caused by Blind Signing, in which the smart contact is approved without complete knowledge of its contents. “This attack vector is quickly becoming the favorite form of cyber attack used by advanced threat actors, including North Korea”, said Blockaid’s CEO Ido Ben Natan. “It’s the same type of attack that was used in the Radiant Capital breach and the WazirX incident.” “The problem is that even with the best key management solutions, today most of the signing process is delegated to software interfaces that interact with dApps.” “This creates a critical vulnerability- it opens the door for malicious manipulation of the signing process, which is exactly what happened in this attack,” he said. The stolen funds are unlikely to be returned because North Korea does not have an extradition agreement with the United States. The North Korean hacking group was able to attain more money in this single hack than in all of its hacks last year. This hack contrasts with other previous large-scale attacks, such as the 2016 Bitfinex hack, in that the people behind this attack will likely get away with it and will most likely keep the stolen money. This shows that the American justice system is limited to countries with extradition agreements. Although America focuses on retrieving lost funds through tax, there’s not much they can do about large-scale hacks. Tom Robinson, Elliptic’s chief scientist, described the attack as the “largest crypto theft of all time.” “The next largest crypto theft would be the $611 million stolen from Poly Network in 2021. In fact it may even be the largest single theft of all time”. Bybit appears to be processing withdrawals just fine after their hack,” wrote Coinbase executive Conor Grogan. They have $20B+ in assets on the platform, and their cold wallets are untouched. “Given the isolated nature of the signing hack and how well capitalized Bybit is, I don’t expect there to be contagion.” “A minute into the FTX bankrun it was clear they had no funds to withdraw. I know everyone has PTSD but Bybit is not an FTX situation, if it was I would be screaming it out. They will be fine”. The Lazarus group’s history can be traced back to 2017 when they hacked South Korean exchanges and stole over $200 million in Bitcoin. Crypto bank robberies seem to be here to stay and will need to be a major focus within the crypto industry."
North Korean Lazarus Group Likely Behind $1.46 Billion Bybit Exchange Hack
With not all information public, Arkham Intelligence, a blockchain analysis firm, has concluded that North Korea’s Lazarus group was responsible for the $1.46 billion hack on the Bybit exchange. On platform X, Arkham offered a bounty of 50,000 ARKM tokens, worth around $30,000, for anyone who could identify the attackers responsible for Friday’s hack. Not long after, Arkham announced that freelancer ZachXBT had provided “definite proof” that the North Korean hacking group was behind the hack. According to current information, Lazarus, North Korea’s elite state-sponsored hacking group, pulled off the largest hack in history on a centralized crypto exchange. The hack resulted in the withdrawal of Ethereum tokens amounting to around $1.5 billion. Ethereum security researchers are scrambling to investigate the incident to understand how the attack happened and whether the hack may spread to other exchanges. Within days, crypto enthusiast ZachXBT identified the Lazarus group as the likely culprit. Lazarus has been responsible for many of the top attacks on digital assets. Blockchain firm Nansen revealed that the attackers first withdrew the funds into a single wallet and then distributed them to multiple wallets. “Initially, the stolen funds were transferred to a primary wallet, which then distributed them across more than 40 wallets”, Nansen said. “The attackers converted all stETH, cmETH, and mETH to ETH before systematically transferring ETH in $27 million increments to over 10 additional wallets”. Ben Zhou, Bybit CEO, urged customers to remain calm and assured them that 80% of funds were recovered by using bridge loans to replace the stolen money. Despite the current bank run on Bybit, Zhou assured users that withdrawals would not be blocked and that customers would have access to their funds. Leveraging bridge loans allows Zhou to honour withdrawal requests. At this stage, the return of stolen tokens is highly unlikely. ZachXBT has yet to release all data pointing to the Lazarus group. He says his analysis involved tracking online connections between wallet addresses until, with the assistance of a colleague, he was able to narrow down the suspects to the North Korean hacking group. ZachXBT found a connection between the wallets used in the Bybit hack and the wallets used in the $85 million hack of Singapore-based exchange Phemex. At this stage, at least, the attack appears to be caused by Blind Signing, in which the smart contact is approved without complete knowledge of its contents. “This attack vector is quickly becoming the favorite form of cyber attack used by advanced threat actors, including North Korea”, said Blockaid’s CEO Ido Ben Natan. “It’s the same type of attack that was used in the Radiant Capital breach and the WazirX incident.” “The problem is that even with the best key management solutions, today most of the signing process is delegated to software interfaces that interact with dApps.” “This creates a critical vulnerability- it opens the door for malicious manipulation of the signing process, which is exactly what happened in this attack,” he said. The stolen funds are unlikely to be returned because North Korea does not have an extradition agreement with the United States. The North Korean hacking group was able to attain more money in this single hack than in all of its hacks last year. This hack contrasts with other previous large-scale attacks, such as the 2016 Bitfinex hack, in that the people behind this attack will likely get away with it and will most likely keep the stolen money. This shows that the American justice system is limited to countries with extradition agreements. Although America focuses on retrieving lost funds through tax, there’s not much they can do about large-scale hacks. Tom Robinson, Elliptic’s chief scientist, described the attack as the “largest crypto theft of all time.” “The next largest crypto theft would be the $611 million stolen from Poly Network in 2021. In fact it may even be the largest single theft of all time”. Bybit appears to be processing withdrawals just fine after their hack,” wrote Coinbase executive Conor Grogan. They have $20B+ in assets on the platform, and their cold wallets are untouched. “Given the isolated nature of the signing hack and how well capitalized Bybit is, I don’t expect there to be contagion.” “A minute into the FTX bankrun it was clear they had no funds to withdraw. I know everyone has PTSD but Bybit is not an FTX situation, if it was I would be screaming it out. They will be fine”. The Lazarus group’s history can be traced back to 2017 when they hacked South Korean exchanges and stole over $200 million in Bitcoin. Crypto bank robberies seem to be here to stay and will need to be a major focus within the crypto industry. Bitcoin World