logo
Best TVs of 2025, Tested by CNET Experts

Best TVs of 2025, Tested by CNET Experts

Yahoo12-02-2025
If you're looking to buy a new TV, you may be overwhelmed by the choices available. That's why we're here: to help you narrow down the options, and pick the best TV for your space and budget. We test for gaming features such as 4K/120Hz as well as streaming movies on the best smart TV platforms. In our CNET lab, we've looked at all the top brands including Samsung, Roku, LG, Hisense, Vizio and TCL side-by-side. From cheap 4K televisions to QLED and high-end OLED TVs, and everything in between, these are the top TVs we've reviewed in 2025.
Read more: How We Test TVs
Given the multitude of options, the latest TCL QM8 series has replaced the 2023 model at the top of our best TV list for a number of reasons. The TCL QM851 offers a number of upgrades on the previous year, including a better backlight, superb picture quality overall and an affordable price tag. When a friend asks me what TV to buy from 65 to 98 inches, I tell them the TCL QM8 series.
Although the QM8 is my current favorite, it may not be right for your preferences or budget. If you want the best TV for the least amount of money, the Samsung DU7200 series is the best we've tested.
TCL has topped our list of the best TVs for the last few years and the QM8 is even better than before. In my comparison tests, it continues to stand out with superior brightness and impact while still maintaining excellent contrast: a combination no other TV could match at this price. The key is mini-LED tech and well-implemented full-array local dimming. It also has a sleek design with a center-mount stand. The operating system is Google TV, which I don't like as much as Roku TV, but it's still a solid smart TV.
The main downside of the TCL QM8 is that it's available only in large sizes (65 inches and up). If you're looking for a 55-inch TV, I recommend the Hisense U8N instead. Note that prices shown here are for the 65-inch size in the QM8 series.
See at Best Buy
If CNET had a best bang-for-buck award one of the first winners would be the Samsung DU7200, a TV which delivers a really good picture for an affordable price. The black levels and shadow detail are excellent for the money, and while our test unit looked a little desaturated out of the box that's easily fixed by adjusting the Color control. It has onboard streaming and the sound quality isn't too bad either. If you're looking for a bedroom unit or a gaming TV then the Samsung DU7200 is the model we would choose.
See at Amazon
If you're looking for the best TV for the money and the TCL QM8 is just too big, the Hisense U8N should be your go-to. I compared the two TVs side by side, and while I liked the picture quality of the QM8 better, the U8N has one medium-size advantage: a 55-inch screen option. If 65 is too large for your room, your budget or your tastes, the choice between the two is simple: Get the 55-inch Hisense U8N.
Both offer excellent image quality and affordable prices thanks to mini-LED backlights and full-array local dimming, as well as similar gaming features and the Google TV operating system. Both cost hundreds less than you'd have to pay to get similar image quality from a better-known brand.
Note that while I tested the 65-inch size in the U8N series, the prices shown here are for the 55-inch size.
See at Amazon
The C4 has better picture quality than any non-OLED TV on this list at a higher price, and it's still not outrageously expensive. Its perfect black levels, unbeatable contrast and superb off-angle viewing kept it a notch above the mini-LED models in my comparison tests, and while its overall brightness isn't quite as impressive, it's still an incredible performer in all kinds of room lighting.
The C4 replaced the C3, and while we'll almost always recommend buying last year's version of a TV, the C4 is available for around the same price and so is the model to go for.
The prices shown here are for the 65-inch size of the LG C4 series.
See at Best Buy
The Samsung S95D's matte finish does more than reduce reflections, it nearly eliminates them, improving image quality in bright rooms more than any OLED TV we've tested. Some non-OLED models have matte screens, but this is the first time they've been available in an OLED TV, a display technology that has always delivered the best picture available. That matte finish really works, reducing windows and other glare to dimmer blobs instead of super-bright, mirror-like distractions. The S95D also has an external box, allowing for a cleaner look with the option to store HDMI connections and the power cord out of sight.
Between its versatile matte screen and awesome picture overall, the Samsung S95D delivers the best image quality of any TV we've tested, beating both the G4 and last year's winner, the G3, as well as any other non-OLED TV. But it also costs a ton, and most people -- even those with bright rooms -- will be perfectly happy with a less expensive TV.
See at Samsung
In our tests over the years, Vizio TVs have produced very good picture quality without breaking the bank. The Vizio Quantum Pro continues this trend: it's a solid midpriced TV option, though not without a few notable drawbacks.
In side-by-side comparison tests in our lab, the Quantum Pro performed well for the money, with better contrast than the similarly priced Roku Plus Series, for example. On the other hand, as expected, slightly more expensive models like the TCL QM8 and Hisense U8K were better, with brighter images and higher contrast.
One major drawback is the Quantum Pro's lack of size offerings; it comes only in 65- or 75-inch sizes. We reviewed the 65-inch model, but the review also applies to the 75-inch version since the specs and picture quality should be similar regardless of size.
If you're looking for a smaller TV in this price range, you might instead turn to the Roku Plus Series, which offers a 55-inch model and a superior smart TV system. Vizio will also continue to offer this TV's predecessor, the M-Series Quantum X, in the 50-inch size.
See at Walmart
Competition among TVs in the middle pricing band is heating up, and the Plus Series is the latest entrant. Unlike the TCL Roku TVs higher on this list, this one is all Roku, with no other brands on board. It adds a couple of step-up extras, including QLED and full-array local dimming, which help deliver a better picture than the TCL 4-Series, for example.
This is the first TV Roku has produced under its own brand, as opposed to partnering with a brand like TCL, Sharp, Pioneer or Hisense. The company also released a version with fewer features and no local dimming, called the Roku Select Series.
The price shown below is for the 65-inch size.
With all of the TVs available today, and all of the technical terms and jargon associated with television technology, it can be tough to figure out what's important. Here's a quick guide to help cut through the confusion.
Screen size: Bigger is better in our book. We recommend a size of at least 43 inches for a bedroom TV and at least 55 inches for a living room or main TV -- and 65 inches or larger is best. More so than any "feature," stepping up in TV screen size is the best use of your money. One of the most common post-TV-purchase complaints we've heard is from people who didn't go big enough. And we rarely hear people complain that their TV is too large.
Price: TVs range in price from $100 to more than $2,000. Smaller screens are cheaper, well-known brands are more expensive and spending more money can also get you better image quality. Most entry-level TVs have a good enough picture for most people, but TVs last a long time, so it might be worth spending more to get a better picture. It's also best to shop for a TV in the fall when prices are lower.
Capability: Among entry-level TVs the most important feature is what kind of smart TV system the TV uses. Among midrange models, look for a feature including full-array local dimming, mini-LED and 120Hz refresh rate, which (unlike some other extras) do help improve the picture in our experience. Among high-end TVs, OLED technology is your best bet.
Our TV reviews follow a rigorous, unbiased evaluation process honed over nearly two decades of TV reviews. Our primary TV test lab has specialized equipment for measuring light and color, including a Konica Minolta CS-2000 spectroradiometer, a Murideo Sig-G 4K HDR signal generator and an AVPro Connect 8x8 4K HDR distribution matrix. We use Portrait Displays CalMan Ultimate software to evaluate every TV we review. In every CNET TV review, three or more similar TVs are compared side by side in various lighting conditions playing different media, including movies, TV shows and games, across a variety of test categories, from color to video processing to gaming to HDR. Our reviews also account for design, features, smart TV performance, HDMI input and gaming compatibility, among other factors.
LG C3: When we reviewed the C3 in 2023 it was one of our favorite TVs, and this impression continued into the following year. It's still a great TV, but with the pricing on this and the C4 being identical right now it makes sense to go for the newer TV.
Samsung S90D: The S90D performed well, but it suffered some contrast loss compared to the C4. Any differences between the C4 and S90D were subtle.
One important aspect of image quality we test is overall brightness. Here's how brightness compares in nits across select TVs listed above.
Check out How We Test TVs for more details.
For more TV buying advice check out How to Buy a TV.
We'll post the answers to commonly asked TV questions below. If you have any others, feel free to reach out on Twitter (@dkatzmaier), or by clicking the little envelope icon on my CNET profile page. Doing so will let you send a message straight to my inbox.
Prices vary widely by size and features, from less than $100 for basic 24-inch TVs to more than $2,000 for big OLED models. TVs last a long time, so we think it's worthwhile to spend a little extra beyond the bare minimum to get a bigger screen, better picture quality or better features. With that in mind, here are some ballpark prices that will get you a very good TV in 2025.
55-inch: $700
65-inch: $1,000
75-inch: $1,300
You could pay (much) more or less. The fact is just about any TV will produce a picture decent enough to satisfy most viewers. Most complaints you read in user reviews aren't about picture quality. Instead, they're about ease of use, smart TV menus or sound (or a broken TV).
In our opinion bigger is better, and your money is best spent on large screen sizes rather than a slight upgrade in image quality. The answer also depends on room size and seating distance: If you have a big room and sit farther away, you'll want a bigger TV.
In our reviews, OLED TVs, which use organic light-emitting diode technology, have always had better picture quality than LED TVs, which are essentially LCD TVs that use LED backlights. The main reason is that OLED TVs can produce a perfectly dark shade of black with no stray illumination of blooming, which leads to better contrast and pop. LED TVs can get brighter, and usually cost less than OLED TVs.
At CNET our favorite is Roku for its simplicity, but different systems like Google TV, Amazon Fire TV, Samsung and LG have different strengths, in particular for voice commands. In any case, we don't consider the built-in smart TV system that important because you can always connect a streaming device to any TV.
Most TVs sound terrible because their thin cabinets don't have room for decent-sized speakers or a bass. If you want to get good sound you should buy an external audio system. Even an inexpensive soundbar will deliver much better audio quality than a TV's built-in speakers.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Samsung Signs Up Multiple New Global TV Partners For Its Tizen OS Smart System
Samsung Signs Up Multiple New Global TV Partners For Its Tizen OS Smart System

Forbes

timean hour ago

  • Forbes

Samsung Signs Up Multiple New Global TV Partners For Its Tizen OS Smart System

Samsung has revealed a major expansion of the licensing programme for its Tizen OS TV smart system that will see it being introduced on TVs from a host of new TV brands in multiple territories across the world. The most notable new additions to the manufacturers and brands licensing Samsung's Tizen OS for their TVs include RCA (Kayve Groupo) in Mexico, RCA (Treasure Creek) in the United States and Canada, Axdia in Germany, and EKO and QBELL (Ayonz) in Australia and Europe. Samsung's Tizen OS has greatly expanded its family of licensed TV brands. Given the truly international scope of these latest additions to the Tizen OS licensing 'family', and the fact that the list of new licensees includes prominent original design manufacturers, it's perhaps not surprising that Samsung also reveals in its announcement of its new licensing deals that its smart platform now includes tailored marketing kits and digital content toolkits for each individual region. Samsung also states that it's broadening Tizen OS's regional coverage, as well as introducing more affordable hardware solutions and working to improve app availability in every territory where its OS is now being adopted. These moves will all make it easier for regional partners to highlight what Samsung identifies as key Tizen OS features such as premium content access, fast performance and advanced smart connectivity. All backed by both enhanced access for any license partner to Samsung's specialized R&D support plus, of course, the trusted power of the Samsung global brand. Now into its 8th generation, Tizen OS's latest key enhancements include AI-backed advanced content discovery tools; integration with Samsung's TV Plus service of streamed TV 'channels'; expanded and enhanced cloud gaming support via the dedicated Gaming Hub section of Tizen OS's interface; and ever more seamless multi-device connectivity through Samsung's SmartThings protocol/platform. Given the explosion in the number of different content streaming services consumers now have access to, it's really not surprising that we're starting to see the smart TV interface world increasingly consolidating around a small number of large, well-established smart platforms. It's just impractical for relatively small brands to take on themselves, with their own home-grown smart platforms, all the necessary content deals and software technicalities associated with onboarding all the apps consumers now expect to find on a smart TV. Other major platforms also doing brisk licensing business right now include Google TV, Amazon Fire TV, Hisense's VIDAA system, Tivo, Roku and LG's WebOS. Samsung's latest Tizen OS includes new content finding features and an enhanced Gaming Hub. 'Tizen OS is recognized for its performance, reliability, and innovation,' said Jooyoung Kim, Vice President at Samsung Electronics. 'This year, we are focused on expanding our licensing program and creating diverse collaboration strategies for our key partners. We are serious about growing our global partner network and enhancing the ecosystem. By offering expanded regional support, an enriched app ecosystem, and tailored marketing resources, we aim to deliver even greater value to consumers worldwide.' Grupo Kayve's Head of Marketing & Communications, Jonathan Vera, adds: 'We are proud to expand our RCA TV portfolio across Mexico and Latin America through our partnership with Samsung's Tizen OS. The Tizen team provides comprehensive technical and marketing support, enabling an agile go-to-market process.' Samsung states that it expects 'many more' global brands to sign up to Tizen OS in the second half of 2025. — Related reading Roku Launches New Upgraded TV Range LG OLED And LCD TVs Are About To Get Easier To Use Freely Streaming Service Signs Up Two More Major TV Brands

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7's display is rated to withstand 500,000 folds
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7's display is rated to withstand 500,000 folds

Engadget

timean hour ago

  • Engadget

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7's display is rated to withstand 500,000 folds

Samsung said the display it used for the Galaxy Z Fold 7 can be folded over twice as many times as the display used for the previous iterations of the model. The foldable OLED panel "remained fully functional" after certification company Bureau Veritas put it through a durability test, wherein it was folded 500,000 times over 13 days. That means if a user folds their phone roughly 100 times a day, the display could last for over 10 years. In its announcement, Samsung said that "durability is no longer a limiting factor in the lifespan of foldable smartphones." The company took cues from bulletproof glass to create a shock-proof design for the new foldable OLED panel. It increased the thickness of the display's outermost glass by 50 percent and applied high-elastic adhesive to every layer of the panel so that it can better absorb external impact. The new display can also distribute shock more evenly across its surface, and Samsung used titanium plate as support for the whole structure to make it stronger than before. In addition, by using more advanced materials and redesigning the panel layer, the company was able to achieve a thinner profile so that the device looks and feels like any regular handset now. Previous versions of the Galaxy Z Fold, from the first through the sixth, were only rated for 200,000 folds. And when CNET tested the first Z Fold itself by using a machine that opened and folded it for hours, it only lasted 119,380 folds despite supposedly being able to withstand 200,000. If the Galaxy Z Fold 7 can get anywhere near the 500,000 folds it can supposedly handle, most users don't have to worry about their screens snapping in two before they change phones.

Congress Isn't Stepping Up to Regulate AI. Where Does That Leave Us Now?
Congress Isn't Stepping Up to Regulate AI. Where Does That Leave Us Now?

CNET

time2 hours ago

  • CNET

Congress Isn't Stepping Up to Regulate AI. Where Does That Leave Us Now?

When you turn on the faucet, you expect the water that comes out to be clean. When you go to the bank, you expect your money will still be there. When you go to the doctor, you expect they will keep your medical information private. Those expectations exist because there are rules to protect you. But when a technology arises almost overnight, the problems come first. The rules, you'd hope, would follow. Right now, there's no technology with more hype and attention than artificial intelligence. Since ChatGPT burst on to the scene in 2022, generative AI has crept into nearly every corner of our lives. AI boosters say it's transformative, comparing it to the birth of the internet or the industrial revolution in its potential to reshape society. The nature of work itself will be transformed. Scientific discovery will accelerate beyond our wildest dreams. All this from a technology that right now, is mostly just kind of good at writing a paragraph. The concerns about AI? They're legion. There are questions of privacy and security. There's concerns about how AI impacts the climate and the environment. There's the problem of hallucination -- that AI will completely make stuff up, with tremendous potential for misinformation. There are liability concerns: Who is responsible for the actions of an AI, or an autonomous system running off of one? Then there are the already numerous lawsuits around copyright infringement related to training data. (Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET's parent company, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.) Those are just today's worries. Some argue that a potential artificial intelligence smarter than humans could pose a massive, existential threat to humanity. What to do about AI is an international debate. In Europe, the EU AI Act, which is currently being phased in, imposes guidelines on AI-based systems based on their risk to individual privacy and safety. In the US, meanwhile, Congress recently proposed barring states from enforcing their own rules around AI for a decade, without a national framework in place, until backing off during last-minute negotiations around the big tax and spending bill. "I think in the end, there is a balance here between enjoying the innovation of AI and mitigating the risks that come with AI," Alon Yamin, CEO of Copyleaks, which runs an AI-powered system for detecting AI-generated writing, told me. "If you're going too far in one end, you will lose something. The situation now is that we're very far to the direction of no regulation at all." Here's a look at some of the issues raised around AI, how regulations might or might not address them and what it all means for you. Watch this: $90 Billion AI Investments, MLB Robot Umpires and More | Tech Today 03:07 Different approaches, with an ocean in between Listen to the debates in Congress about how to regulate artificial intelligence, and a refrain quickly becomes apparent: AI companies and many US politicians don't want anything like the rules that exist in Europe. The EU AI Act has become shorthand for a strict regulatory structure around AI. In brief, it requires companies to ensure their technology is safe, transparent and responsible. It sorts AI technologies into categories based on the level of risk. The highest-risk categories are either prohibited entirely (things like social scoring or manipulative technologies) or heavily restricted (things like biometrics and tools for hiring and law enforcement). Lower-risk technologies, like most of the work done by large language models we're familiar with (ChatGPT, etc.), are subject to less scrutiny but still must meet certain transparency and privacy requirements. A key feature of the EU's standards and those in other places, like the United Kingdom, is transparency about the use of AI. "What these things are fundamentally saying is, we're not trying to block the use of AI but giving consumers the right to opt into it or not or even to know it's even there," said Ben Colman, CEO of the identity verification company Reality Defender. During a May hearing on AI regulation in the US Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Sen. Ted Cruz referred to the EU's standards as "stifling" and "heavy-handed." Cruz, a Texas Republican, specifically objected to any kind of prior approval for AI technologies. He asked OpenAI CEO Sam Altman what effect similar rules would have on the industry in the US, and Altman said it would be "disastrous." Earlier this month, Meta said it wouldn't sign the EU's Code of Practice for general-purpose AI, which is intended to provide a framework to help AI companies follow the regulations of the EU AI Act. In a post on LinkedIn, Joel Kaplan, Meta's chief global affairs officer, called it an "over-reach" that "will throttle the development and deployment of frontier AI models in Europe." "Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI," Kaplan said. But regulations focused on high-risk systems like those used in hiring, health care and law enforcement might miss some of the more subtle ways AI can affect our lives. Think about the spread of AI-generated slop on social media or the creation of realistic-looking videos for political misinformation. Those are also social media issues, and the battle over regulation to minimize the harms with that technology may illuminate what could happen with AI. Read more: AI Essentials: 29 Ways You Can Make Gen AI Work for You, According to Our Experts Lessons from social media After a South by Southwest panel in March on regulating AI, I asked Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, long a vocal observer of tech's problems, what worried him most about AI. His response: "AI totally screwing up in the context of social media and making it so we have no coherence in our understanding of national politics." Social media has long been fraught with harmful social implications. The spread of misinformation and erosion of trust in the last decade or so are largely results of the growth of these networks. Generative AI, which can reinforce biases and produce believable but false content with ease, now poses those same problems. On top of those parallels, some of the companies and key figures in AI come straight from the world of social media technology, like Meta and Elon Musk's X. "We're seeing a lot of the same repeats of social media fights, of privacy fights where companies do whatever they want and do a sort of vague gesture of doing something about it," said Ben Winters, director of AI and privacy at the Consumer Federation of America. There are some key differences between those fights and the ones around AI, Winters said. One is that lawmakers and regulators are familiar with the mistakes associated with social media and want to avoid repeating them. "I think we're ahead of the curve in terms of response, but one thing that I really hope we can see at the federal level is a willingness to put some basic requirements on these companies," he said. At the May Senate committee hearing, OpenAI's Altman said he's also wary of repeating past mistakes. "We're trying to learn the lessons of the previous generation," he said. "That's kind of the way it goes. People make mistakes and you do it better next time." What kinds of AI regulations are we talking about? In my conversations with artificial intelligence experts and observers, some themes have emerged regarding the rules and regulations that could be implemented. They boil down, in the short term, to questions about the role of AI in impactful decision-making, misinformation, copyright and accountability. Other concerns, like the threat of "superintelligence" or the loss of jobs, also exist, although those are far more complicated. High-risk systems This is where the EU AI Act and many other international laws around artificial intelligence focus. In the US, it's also at the center of Colorado's AI law, which passed in 2024 and will be effective in 2026. The idea is that when AI tools are used to make important decisions, about things employment, health care or insurance, they are used in a way that minimizes discrimination and errors and maximizes transparency and accountability. AI and other predictive technologies can be used in a lot of different ways, whether by governments for programs like child protective services or by private entities for advertising and tracking, Anjana Susarla, a professor at Michigan State University, told me recently. "The question becomes, is this something where we need to monitor the risks of privacy, the risks of consumer profiling, should we monitor any kind of consumer harms or liabilities?" she said. Misinformation Gen AI has a well-documented history of making stuff up. And that's if you're using it in good faith. It can also be used to produce deepfakes -- realistic-looking images and video intended to manipulate people into believing something untrue, changing the behavior of voters and undermining democracy. "Social media is the main instrument now for disinformation and hate speech," said Shalom Lappin, a professor of computational linguistics at Queen Mary University of London and author of the new book Understanding the Artificial Intelligence Revolution: Between Catastrophe and Utopia. "AI is a major factor because much of this content is coming from artificial agents." Lies and rumors have spread since the dawn of communication, but generative AI tools like video and image generators can produce fabricated evidence more convincing than any past counterfeit, at tremendous speed and very little cost. On the internet today, too often you cannot, and should not, believe your own eyes. It can be hard for people to see just how easy it is to fake something -- and just how convincing those fakes can be. Colman, with Reality Defender, said seeing the possible problem is believing. "When we show somebody a good or a bad deepfake of them, they have that 'a-ha' moment of, 'wow, this is happening, it can happen to me,'" he said. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, points to a poster during a July 2025 hearing on artificial intelligence model training and copyright There are two copyright issues when it comes to generative AI. The first is the most well-documented: Did AI companies violate copyright laws by using vast amounts of information available on the internet and elsewhere without permission or compensation? That issue is working itself out in the courts, with mixed results so far, and will likely take much longer before something all-encompassing comes out of it. "They've essentially used everything that's available. It's not only text, it's images, photographs, charts, sound, audio files," Lappin said. "The copyright violations are huge." But what about the copyright of content created by AI tools? Is it owned by the person who prompted it or by the company that produced the language model? What if the model produces content that copies or plagiarizes existing content without credit, or violates copyrights? Accountability The second copyright issue gets at the problem of accountability: What happens when an AI does something wrong, violates a law or hurts somebody? On the content front, social media companies have long been protected behind a US legal standard, known colloquially as Section 230, that says they aren't responsible for what their users do. But that's a harder test for AI companies, because the user isn't the one creating this content, the company's language model is, Winters said. Then there are actual, material harms that can come from the interactions people have with AI. A prominent example of this is mental health, where people using AI characters and chatbots as therapists have received bad advice, the kind that could cost a human provider their license or worse, the kind that resulted in self-harm or worse outcomes for the person involved. The issue is magnified even more when it comes to children, who likely have even less understanding of how they should treat what an AI says. Who should regulate AI? The question of whose job it is to regulate AI was at the heart of the congressional debate over the moratorium on state laws and rules. In that discussion, the question was whether, in the US, companies should have to navigate one set of rules passed by Congress or 50 or more sets of regulations implemented by the states. AI companies and business groups said the creation of a "patchwork" of laws would hinder development. In a June letter to Senate leaders, Consumer Technology Association CEO and Vice Chair Gary Shapiro pointed to more than 1,000 state bills that had been introduced regarding AI in 2025 so far. "This isn't regulation -- it's chaos," he wrote. But those bill introductions haven't turned into an avalanche of laws on the books. "Despite the amount of interest from policymakers at the state level, there haven't been a ton of AI-specific laws passed in the United States," said Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, managing director, DC, for the privacy trade group IAPP. States can experiment with new approaches. California can try one thing, Colorado another and Texas something entirely different. An approach that works will spread to other states and could lead to rules that protect consumers without stifling businesses. But other experts say in the 21st century, companies with the size and scope of those pushing artificial intelligence can only truly be regulated at the international level. Lappin said he believes an appropriate venue is international trade agreements, which could keep companies from hiding some services in certain countries and having customers circumvent protections with VPNs. "Because these are international rather than national concerns, it seems to me that without international constraints, the regulation will not be effective," Lappin said. What about superintelligence? So far, we've mostly focused on the impact of the tech that is available today. But the biggest boosters of AI are always talking about how much smarter the next model will be and how soon we'll get technology that exceeds human intelligence. Yes, that worries some folks. And they think regulation is important to ensure AI doesn't view that explanation from Morpheus in The Matrix as an instruction manual for world domination. The Future of Life Institute has suggested a government agency with a view into the development of the most advanced AI models. And maybe an off switch, said Jason Van Beek, FLI's chief government affairs officer. "You theoretically would not be able to control them at some point, so just trying to make sure there's some technology that would allow these systems to be turned off if there's some evidence of a loss of control of the situation," he told me. Other experts were more skeptical that "artificial general intelligence" or superintelligence or anything like that was on the horizon. A survey earlier this year of AI experts found three-quarters doubted current large language models would scale up to AGI. "You're getting a lot of hype over general intelligence and stuff like that, superintelligent agents taking over, and I don't see a solid scientific or engineering basis for those fears," Lappin said. The fact is, human beings don't need to wait for a genius-level robot to pose an existential threat. We're more than capable of that ourselves. Should regulators worry about job losses? One of those more immediate threats is the possibility that AI will cause mass layoffs as large numbers of jobs are replaced by AI or otherwise made redundant. That poses significant social challenges, especially in the United States, where many fundamentals of life, like health care, are still tied to having a job. Van Beek said FLI has suggested the US Department of Labor start keeping track of AI-related job losses. "That's certainly a major concern about whether these frontier technologies are going to be taking over huge swaths of industries in terms of jobs or those kinds of things and affecting the economy in very, very deep ways," he said. There have been major technological innovations that have caused massive displacement or replacement of workers before. Think of the Industrial Revolution or the dawn of the computer age. But those often happened over decades or generations. AI could throw the economy into chaos over a matter of years, Lappin said. The Industrial Revolution also put industries out of work at varying times, but AI could hit every industry at once. "The direction is toward much, much more widespread automation across a very broad domain or range of professions," he said. "And the faster that happens, the much more disruptive that will become." What matters most? Transparency and privacy The first step, as with laws already passed in the EU, California and Colorado, is to provide some sort of visibility into how AI systems work and how they're being used. For you, the consumer, the citizen, the person just trying to exist in the world, that transparency means you have a sense of how AI is being used when you interact with it. This could be transparency into how models operate and what went into training them. It could be understanding how models are being used to do things like decide who a company hires and fires. Right now, that doesn't really exist, and it definitely doesn't exist in a way that's easy for a person to understand. Winters suggested a system similar to that used by financial institutions to evaluate whether someone can get loans -- the credit report. You have the right to inspect your credit report, see what has been said about you and ensure it's right. "You have this number that is impactful about you; therefore, you have transparency and can seek corrections," he said. The other centerpiece of most proposals right now is privacy -- protecting people against unauthorized recreations of themselves in AI, guarding against exploitation of personal information and identity. While some existing, technology-neutral privacy laws should be able to protect consumers, policymakers need to keep an eye on the changing ways AI is used to ensure they're still doing the job. "It has to be some kind of balance," Susarla said. "We don't want to stop innovation, but on the other hand we also need to recognize that there can be real consequences."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store