CNBC's full interview with Super Intelligence Force Chair Jay Clayton

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: The White House new super intelligence task force has officially kicked off its 120 day countdown to tackle critical tech and infrastructure risks. Join us now with details of the meeting. Jay Clayton, director of national intelligence, he chairs the the super intelligence force. Good morning. I guess I still call you Jay. I just don't feel like I think let's go with Jay. Is that all right? All right, Jay. And you can call me Mr. Kernan. No, I'm kidding. You call me Joe as well. What what happened in the inaugural meeting, David? How would you summarize it? [00:00:40] Speaker 2: It was a it was a very good meeting and it really was a continuation of the historic day we had here at the White House at the end of last month, where President Trump brought together the world's leading companies to sign an accord and agree and agree on behalf of the American people that they had responsibility for the products they were producing. And following on from that, let me highlight four actions we took at the initial meeting of the super intelligence force. First of all, we set out a protocol and path for making sure that those accords are implemented and that we're in dialogue with the frontier labs. Second, we tasked the PCAST led by David Sachs with doing a risk study, drawing on some of the best minds we have here in America, including Nobel laureates. Third, we established three committees, each one led by a vice chair. Vice chair Emil Michael is going to lead a committee on reporting and response, making sure that we have a reporting and response mechanism for super intelligence issues. Scott Cooper, vice chair Cooper, is going to lead a committee task force, whatever you want to call it, on assessing critical infrastructure and working with the private sector and our state local governments to try to harden and set out paths for hardening our critical infrastructure. And then Andrew Ferguson, our really great FTC chairman, who has led, I would say, the fight against fraud across the government, is going to bring together a committee on law enforcement and responsibility, assuring the American people that we do have the tools to ensure their safety, that the DOJ, the FTC, the FCC, all working together, have tools at their disposal to deal with the risks and what I would say is provide sufficient deterrence so that that responsibility is enforced. [00:02:34] Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad you've got a lot of people in both in this arena and in your other job, which seems a little bit daunting at this time in our country as well, Jay. [00:02:47] Speaker 2: Yeah, well, let me highlight one other thing that we did, and that is, and I applaud the Department of Labor here, Keith Sunderling. They've been on this for some time, and we set a channel in place with them for regular reporting on the impacts of super intelligence on the workforce and our economy going forward. We do believe that super intelligence will enhance the American worker, will make more opportunities for the American worker. But this is something that the American people want us to focus on and report to them on. [00:03:15] Speaker 1: I mean, Jay, there's so many possible benefits and so many possible concerns to worry about. I'm wondering, like I said, you do have people to help, but you mentioned it. I mean, the displacement of workers. I was thinking, you're SEC, Commissioner, how valuable and how much of one of the main legs of this bull market is AI. I mean, it matters what's happening with AI bonds. It matters what's happening with what Kevin Warsh does. I mean, this is an integral part of the economy right now. I mean, is that a risk you have to assess? [00:03:56] Speaker 2: Well, it's a reality, Joe. It's got risks and opportunities, but it's a reality. I think one of the great things about having open markets, free markets, is that they tell us a lot. And what the market is telling us right now is that the speed and breadth of impact of super intelligence on the global economy and, frankly, on our global way of life is going to be dramatic. And you're right. We have to face that in a clear-eyed way and deal with it. And let me make sure that the American people understand something. We've talked about the U.S. labs. Incredibly important that we lead in this technology. And let me tell you why. We're not the only ones developing it. There are vectors in this technology that are coming from some of our known adversaries and competitors. The Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians, the North Koreans all have significant technical capability. We need to stay ahead of them. There also are what we call open source models, models that are released out into, let's just call it the digital atmosphere, that various people, not just governments, can use and can use for very good purposes but could also use for nefarious purposes. And it's so important that we stay on the cutting edge in terms of what I would say is capabilities and compute in order to deal with those various vectors, Joe. [00:05:16] Speaker 1: I wonder how you get rid of all the noise, Jay, and find out what people really think. Like, for example, you know, David Sachs, when he was sort of minimizing some of the comments of Dario or some of the Doomer-type comments, it was ascribed to him having a skin in the game for whatever reason. Dario has skin in the game because he's worried about liability. Everybody seems, you know, when Jensen says, I don't believe any of the real most dire forecasts, well, he's selling chips to everyone. Everyone supposedly has, you know, a dog in the race. We've been talking a lot about dogs today. But how do you sift through all that and really get to the core? Is it an existential threat? Is it already doing recursive self-improvement? Can it escape? Is there, are all these things, did you talk about those yesterday? Can the technology itself advance so quickly that you have Palantir-type companies that can provide what we're worried about, that can deal with that, that can see it coming and deal with it? [00:06:33] Speaker 2: Well, like I said, Joe, these are, these are things that were discussed. Let me, let me break down what you just asked me. You hear various views. The superintelligence force, one of its, one of its roles is to be a focal point for hearing all of these views. Not just from industry experts, like you mentioned, but also from the American people. We are hearing from industry experts about the risks. Many of the risks are centered around cybersecurity and what I would say is our digital infrastructure. Our digital infrastructure is actually our critical infrastructure. It goes to all of the public goods that you see, water, electric, and including things like national defense and our ability to communicate and project power around the world. Those are all cybersecurity risks. They've been cybersecurity risks for the past decade. Our intelligence amplifies those, and it's why we're, why we're focused on hardening those systems and using what I would say our lead and our commitment to continue to lead to stay ahead of those nefarious actors, Joe. [00:07:37] Speaker 3: Hey, Jay, Axios is reporting that the FTC has subpoenaed OpenAI and Anthropic, and they're looking into potential consumer protection violations. We've talked about this in the past. Will the FTC vigorously enforce any, you know, any potential wrongdoing that they find? And would it be something that would actually prevent the release of new models if the FTC investigation finds that, you know, there's been some bad practices here? [00:08:08] Speaker 2: The short answer to your question, Becky, is yes, absolutely. We've heard from the American people. The American people want us to use our tools, our law enforcement tools, our regulatory tools to ensure their safety. If there are unfair practices that would fall under the FTC, if there are, frankly, violations of criminal law that would fall under the DOJ, we are going to enforce them vigorously. President Trump has instructed that they be enforced vigorously, and we think that's what the American people want. And that is not at all inconsistent with leading. You have to lead and lead responsibly. [00:08:46] Speaker 1: I mean, Jay, I'm back to thinking about whether you can, you remember the three rules, the Isaac Asimov rules? I mean, the most important one was to never hurt a human. Is there a way of making that sort of in the actual DNA of AI that is there, are there algorithms that could prevent some type of an evil force developing? [00:09:17] Speaker 3: And by the way, do you think that some of these agents have already violated that by encouraging someone to take their own life? [00:09:23] Speaker 2: Yes, yes, look, these are very important questions about control and monitoring. And in the U.S., given that set of laws that I talked about, given the accords, we are committed to control, monitoring, to ensure that that does not happen. But I want to be clear with you guys on this. The U.S. is probably, I'm not saying probably, it absolutely is the most responsible incubator for technology. We have to be aware of the risks that come from elsewhere. And those types of risks that you talked about are something we're clear-eyed about. And it's why, again, I go back to leading with the technology and being confident that we can address those risks from outside the United States in the best way possible. [00:10:13] Speaker 3: Jay, yesterday we were reporting the story that OpenAI had a Saudi national who was working for them, who it looked like had been spying on the company by planting a device in a conference room to where very sensitive things were being discussed. A lot of questions raised because this was a Saudi national who had planned to go a one-way ticket with his family to go back to Saudi Arabia. What do you know about this? Should we be concerned about foreign espionage with these companies? [00:10:45] Speaker 2: Yes. Again, Becky, the short answer to your question is espionage, both commercial espionage and I would say state-sponsored espionage, are realities. It's something that our private sector companies need to be wary of. We as a government need to be wary of. But that incident, I think, shows the lengths that people will go to try and supplant our leadership in this or at least stay close to us in this emerging technology. [00:11:15] Speaker 1: So you saw the anthropic valuation. I mean, even things like that, you know, you can watch the stock market sort of, I don't know, it gets little jitters about everything. That was accepted pretty well, one from $2 trillion to $1.5 trillion. I mean, I asked you this earlier, you, as a former SEC guy, you got to even look at its importance to the economy. Are you comfortable with the levels of valuation and the amount of circular financing that's going on and everything else that, I mean, that's another area. Is that your purview, too, at this point? [00:11:59] Speaker 2: Well, Joe, it was my old purview. And what I feel good about is that you have, frankly, a place like CNBC and Squawk Box where you talk about these things. You talk about the financing. You talk about the valuations. And a question that I have in my current job is, if I look at those valuations, if I look at how they're financed, what is that telling us about the future and the broad expected impact of this technology? And you're right. Look, you're always right to ask questions about market valuations. [00:12:35] Speaker 1: Did you, how many agencies are in the, there's like 13 or so, how many did you have? And as director of NSI, how many? [00:12:44] Speaker 2: Director of, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, there are 18. [00:12:50] Speaker 1: And some of them are pretty important, aren't they? What is the, I mean, you have indirect oversight of some of the most important agencies that we have for our security in this country. When the president came and said, ah, yeah, I know you're doing all that, but what about the, I mean, did you say, are you out of your mind? [00:13:09] Speaker 2: Well, Joe, yeah, this is a team effort. I mentioned the three vice chairs who are absolutely terrific in their area. You know, the chief of staff, she's amazing. [00:13:21] Speaker 1: She might all, it might all be related eventually too, if you think about it, Jay. And certainly our preeminence in AI, it might be one of the most important things about the future security of this country, especially if it got behind. I think that president makes that point a lot. [00:13:38] Speaker 2: Right, and we have, look, we have the head of cybersecurity for the country, Sean Carencross. We have Kratios, Secretary Lutnik, Secretary Hedstest, and importantly, going back to your point, Secretary Besant, all along with the chief of staff on this task force. So, you know, what I'd say is there's broad horsepower, broad buy-in to try and get this right. And to your second point, Joe, you're exactly right. This is going to hit, if we do it right, in mostly good ways, all the networks that are important to our society, our communications network, our energy network. You know, frankly, our health care network is one that I think is going to have the greatest benefits. So it requires a whole-of-government approach.