Emergency civilization-saving meeting delayed because Conference Room B unavailable until 2:30
WASHINGTON – Scientists warning that humanity must establish stronger controls over advanced artificial intelligence before systems become vastly more capable received an encouraging response from government officials Monday when authorities scheduled a committee meeting for Thursday afternoon.
The current debate concerning A.I. risks appears here.
“We recognize the urgency,” announced Deputy Assistant Undersecretary Harold Fleming. “That is why we are moving this directly onto the agenda.”
Reporters asked when action might follow.
Fleming consulted his binder.
“Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.”
The meeting begins at 2:30.
Coffee arrives at 2:45.
Nothing important will happen after 3:15.
The Task Force on Everything: TAIRMRHSP Fails Focus Groups
Government has confronted rapid technological change before.
Its preferred strategy is to create a committee sufficiently large that no dangerous idea can move through it quickly.
The newly formed Task Force on Advanced Artificial Intelligence Risk Mitigation, Regulatory Harmonization and Strategic Preparedness includes representatives from twelve agencies, six advisory councils and one office nobody remembers establishing.
Its first task is determining its acronym.
TAIRMRHSP performed poorly in focus groups.
Consultants suggested SAFE-AI.
Another agency already uses SAFE.
The acronym issue has been referred to a working group.
Scientists remain patient.
They have tried explaining that advanced technologies can evolve faster than traditional regulatory processes.
Government officials acknowledge the problem.
The committee will study whether committees move too slowly.
Preliminary findings are expected in eighteen months.
Standard Washington Procedure: Hearing, Report, Comment, Litigation
The process follows standard Washington procedure.
First comes a hearing.
Then a report.
Then public comments.
Then revised guidance.
Then industry objections.
Then litigation.
Then revised guidance on the revised guidance.
At some point everyone involved retires.
Technology has advanced eleven generations.
A new committee begins.
Critics argue that government moves too slowly.
Officials reject the characterization.
“We can move very quickly,” said Fleming. “We scheduled Thursday on Monday.”
That is three days.
By federal standards, this is Formula One.
Why Silicon Valley Loves Stakeholder Engagement
Silicon Valley has responded enthusiastically.
Companies prefer government meetings to government regulations.
Every hour officials spend discussing whether to regulate is another hour products remain available.
Lobbyists therefore support robust stakeholder engagement.
The more stakeholders, the better.
Ideally several thousand.
Public-interest groups are also invited.
So are academics.
Consumer advocates.
Trade associations.
Technical experts.
National-security officials.
Labor representatives.
Nobody receives more than four minutes to speak.
The artificial intelligence under discussion could summarize the entire process in seconds.
It has not been invited because procurement has not approved the software.
Government computers still run a browser version last updated during the Obama administration.
This may ultimately prove to be America’s greatest A.I. defense.
No superintelligence can conquer an agency requiring Internet Explorer compatibility.
The Commission to Consider a Board to Study an Agency
Researchers continue urging rapid action.
Lawmakers promise they understand.
One senator announced legislation creating a commission empowered to recommend creation of an independent board tasked with considering whether a permanent agency should be established.
The crowd stood and applauded.
Progress.
Thursday’s meeting may be postponed, however.
Conference Room B is needed for a seminar on printer security.
Conference Room C has a broken projector.
The large auditorium requires approval.
Officials are exploring Zoom.
The government firewall blocks the link.
Artificial intelligence continues advancing.
But so does the committee.
The agenda is almost final.
Can Regulation Keep Pace With A.I.? The Pacing Problem Explained
Scholars have a name for the mismatch: the Collingridge dilemma, which holds that a technology is easiest to shape early, when its effects are unclear, and hardest to shape later, once its effects are obvious. Federal rulemaking is deliberately deliberate; the Administrative Procedure Act builds in public notice and comment, and you can read and file comments on proposed rules at Regulations.gov. Bills and hearings are searchable at Congress.gov.
Government watchdogs have weighed in on the technology itself. The Government Accountability Office regularly reviews how federal agencies adopt and oversee A.I., and the NIST A.I. Risk Management Framework shows what voluntary standards-setting looks like in practice. Congress once had in-house technology experts at the Office of Technology Assessment before it was defunded in 1995. Whether Conference Room B will ever open up remains outside the scope of any of these sources.
Satire Disclaimer
This is satire. Government agencies do not universally move with comic slowness, but bureaucracy provides an irresistible contrast with technologies evolving on much faster commercial timelines. This story is entirely a human collaboration between two sentient beings – the world’s oldest tenured professor and a philosophy major turned dairy farmer.
SOURCE: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/03/opinion/letters/ai-threats-risks.html
Mei Lin Chen is a student writer whose satire explores identity, modern culture, and social nuance. Her work reflects academic curiosity and engagement with London’s diverse perspectives.
Expertise is growing through study and practice, while trust is supported by clear intent and responsible humour.
