HN
Hacker News • 18시간 전
NSA, AI 모델 테스트에 수십억 달러 지출
IMP 8/10
핵심 요약
분류 등급 정보에 따르면 미국 국가안보국(NSA)이 올해 최첨단 AI 모델 평가·테스트에 수십억 달러의 세금을 지출하고 있습니다. 이는 이전에 알려진 것보다 훨씬 큰 규모로, 포괄적인 AI 규제 시스템 구축에 연간 수백억 달러가 들 수 있다는 우려를 낳고 있습니다. AI 안전성 검증의 재정 부담을 프론티어 랩들이 부담해야 한다는 목소리가 커지고 있습니다.
번역된 본문
기술 | 분류 등급 추정치, NSA가 AI 모델 테스트에 수십억 달러 지출 — 비용은 이전에 알려진 것보다 훨씬 큰 것으로 드러났다.
미국 국가안보국(NSA)이 분류 등급 정보 추정치에 익숙한 두 소식통에 따르면, 올해 고도화된 인공지능 모델을 평가하고 테스트하는 데 수십억 달러의 납세자 자금을 지출하고 있다고 의원들에게 전했다.
이 비용은 이전에 알려진 것보다 상당히 큰 규모로, 의원들은 더 포괄적인 AI 규제 시스템이 정부에 연간 수백억 달러의 비용을 초래할 수 있다고 보고 있다.
도널드 트럼프 대통령은 대체로 연방 차원의 AI 감독 강화 요구에 저항해왔으며, 의회와 프론티어 랩(최첨단 AI 기업)들이 모델에 새로운 안전장치를 부과하려는 규제 제안을 거부해왔다. 하지만 일련의 고조된 해킹 및 보안 사건 이후 NSA의 인공지능보안센터(AISC)는 잠재적 국가안보 취약점을 파악하기 위해 프론티어 모델 테스트를 시작했다.
이러한 노력의 높은 비용은 세계에서 가장 강력하고 자원이 풍부한 기업들이 설계한 AI 모델 검토에서 정부의 역할에 관한 논쟁에 새로운 긴급성을 불어넣고 있다. 또한 기술이 더 발전할수록 지출이 더 불어날 것으로 예상되는 만큼, 프론티어 랩들이 모델 검토의 재정적 부담을 떠안아야 한다는 목소리를 강화할 수 있다.
인기 기사: 데이나 밀뱅크: 원래 꽤 나쁜 한 주였다. 그런데 트럼프가 중국에 항복했다 / 의원을 잡기 가장 좋은 장소? 화장실에서 / 대법원, 갱신된 이민자 데이터베이스로 유권자 정리 허용 / 정부 웹사이트 AI 테스트를 둘러싼 혼란 속으로
새로운 연방 AI 규제 감독 체계를 구축하자는 이전 제안들의 추정 비용은 훨씬 낮았다. 예를 들어 국회예산국(CBO)은 AI 리스크 센터를 설립하고 '위험 완화를 촉진'하는 초당적 하원 법안인 'AI 안전·혁신법'이 연간 약 2천만 달러의 비용이 들 것으로 추정했다. CBO에 따르면 AI에 대한 새로운 보고·추적 시스템을 구축하는 또 다른 하원 법안은 향후 5년간 총 3,600만 달러를 요구한다.
일론 머스크 같은 일부 기술 지도자들은 정부 감독 없이 프론티어 랩들이 출시 전 서로의 모델을 검토해야 한다고 제안했다. 목요일 더 인포메이션은 구글, 오픈AI, 앤스로픽이 AI 안전에 중점을 둔 자체 '표준 기구'를 만들기 위해 공동으로 작업 중이라고 보도했다. 하지만 일부 AI 안전 전문가들은 이 방식이 사실상 기업들이 스스로를 감독하는 것을 허용하는 것이라며 반박했다.
대안 중 하나는 정부가 AI 기업에 세금을 부과해 이러한 안전 운영을 진행하는 것으로, 독립성을 보장하고 AI 규제의 재정 부담이 주로 납세자에게 돌아가지 않도록 하는 것이다. 앤스로픽과 오픈AI는 더 강한 연방 감독을 원하며 그 비용을 부담하는 것에도 열려 있을 수 있다고 밝힌 바 있다.
현재 NSA의 AI 테스트 노력은 연방 국가안보 예산 중 분류 등급 부분으로 자금을 조달받고 있다고 두 소식통이 전했다. 정부가 지금까지 지출한 정확한 금액은 알려지지 않았다. 국방부는 NSA의 AI 지출에 대해 논평을 거부했다. 국방부 대변인은 "보안상의 이유로 국방부는 AI 도구의 기술 아키텍처나 자원 배분에 대해 논의하지 않는다"고 말했다.
국방부의 연간 예산은 약 1조 달러에 달한다. 이미 군에 배정된 예산 자금 일부는 AI 관련 지출로 전환될 수 있어 잠재적 비용을 줄일 수 있다. 한 소식통에 따르면 지금까지 NSA의 가장 큰 AI 관련 비용은 추가적인 컴퓨팅 파워였다.
원문 보기 (영어)
Technology Classified Estimates Show the NSA Is Paying Billions to Test AI Models The price tag is significantly higher than previously known. The NSA’s Artificial Intelligence Security Center has been testing frontier models to identify potential national security vulnerabilities. T. Schneider/AP By Jeff Stein September 24, 2026 12:22 p.m. Email LinkedIn Twitter Copy Link copied The National Security Agency told lawmakers that it is spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds this year evaluating and testing advanced artificial intelligence models, according to two sources familiar with classified intelligence estimates. The price tag — which is significantly greater than previously known — has led lawmakers to believe that a more comprehensive AI regulatory system could cost the government tens of billions of dollars per year, the sources said. President Donald Trump has mostly resisted calls for greater federal oversight of AI, rejecting regulatory proposals from members of Congress and the frontier labs aimed at imposing new safeguards on the models. But after a string of high-profile hacking and security incidents , the NSA’s Artificial Intelligence Security Center began testing frontier models to identify potential national security vulnerabilities. The high cost of those efforts is bringing new urgency to the debate about the government’s role in reviewing AI models designed by some of the most powerful and resourceful companies in the world. It also may intensify calls to have the frontier labs to shoulder the financial burden of reviewing the models, especially with spending set to only balloon as the technology grows more advanced. Trending Dana Milbank: It Was Already a Pretty Bad Week. Then Trump Surrendered to China. The Best Place to Catch a Lawmaker? Where They Pee. Supreme Court Allows States to Purge Voters Using an Updated Immigration Database Inside the Freakout Over AI Testing in Government Websites Estimates of prior proposals to establish new federal AI regulatory oversight suggested a far lower price tag. For instance, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the AI Security and Innovation Act, a bipartisan House proposal to establish a center on AI risks and “facilitate the mitigation of those risks,” would cost roughly $20 million per year. A separate bill in the House to establish a new reporting and tracking system for AI calls for $36 million in total over the next five years, the CBO reported. Some tech leaders, like billionaire Elon Musk, have suggested that the frontier labs should review each other’s models prior to their release without government oversight. On Thursday, The Information reported that Google, OpenAI and Anthropic are jointly working on a plan to create their own AI safety-focused “standards body.” But some AI safety experts have rejected this model as effectively allowing the firms to police themselves. One alternative is for the government to levy a tax on AI companies to run these safety operations — both to ensure independence and to ensure the financial burden of regulating AI does not fall primarily on the taxpayers. Anthropic and OpenAI have suggested that they want greater federal oversight and may be open to paying for it as well. Currently, NSA’s AI testing efforts are being funded by classified portions of the federal national security budget, the two sources familiar said. The exact dollar amount the government has spent so far is not clear. The Pentagon declined to comment on what the NSA is spending on AI. “For security reasons, the Department does not discuss the technical architecture or resource allocation for its AI tools,” a spokesperson for the Defense Department said. The Defense Department’s annual budget is close to $1 trillion. Some budgetary funds already allocated to the military could be shifted into AI-related spending, reducing the potential price tag. One source said the biggest AI-related cost to the NSA thus far has been the extra computing power: the processing on chips necessary to run and test the AI models. Purchasing computing power has become incredibly expensive worldwide amid a surge in demand accompanied by insufficient production of chips. For instance, Anthropic has lined up computing deals that could cost as much as $517 billion, according to The Information. Another big expense is in hiring personnel. Some top AI engineers have been offered salaries in the hundreds of millions of dollars, far outpacing what the government could match. NSA is widely regarded as having the deepest roster of technical experts within the government and still may not be able to compete with the giant pay packages thrown around by the frontier labs. “Having in-house AI evaluation capability I think is extremely important and necessary. But it is genuinely expensive,” said Nathan Calvin, general counsel at Encode, an AI advocacy organization. “You’re competing in bidding with some of the most price-insensitive customers.” Some experts have pushed for lawmakers to swiftly move to strengthen third-party audits of the models. Nat Purser, director of U.S. Policy at the AI Verification and Evaluation Research Institute, said that while “people often underestimate how much computing power it can take to rigorously test advanced AI systems,” the government should make the investments necessary. Purser also said the AI companies could foot the bill if taxpayers are paying large sums to evaluate the models. “If we want the government to be equipped to assess these systems, we need to fund the computing resources and expertise that requires,” Purser said. “I think of these tests as public goods, but there are reasonable questions about if taxpayers should foot the bill. An assessment on frontier developers could be required to help fund these independent audits, including the necessary computing resources.” Author Jeff Stein is a reporter at The Washington Sun. Welcome to The Washington Sun. Sign up for free to get our local newsletter covering the neighborhoods, politics and people shaping D.C. Have an account? Log in Welcome to The Washington Sun. Sign up for free to get our local newsletter covering the neighborhoods, politics and people shaping D.C. Email address Register for free Or continue with Sign in with Google Sign in with Microsoft Sign in with Apple Sign in with X Already have an account? Log in . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. By continuing, you agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy , and Subscription Agreement Terms and Conditions . Welcome to The Washington Sun Subscribe to maintain unlimited access to independent journalism covering Washington's people, politics and power. Email address Continue Or continue with Sign in with Google Sign in with Microsoft Sign in with Apple Sign in with X Don’t have an account? Sign up . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. By continuing, you agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy , and Subscription Agreement Terms and Conditions . Check your email for a one-time code. We sent a 4-digit code to . Enter the pin to confirm your account. Need another confirmation email? Resend code . Resend code . One time password Sign in New code will be available in 1:00 Return to options Let’s try this again. We encountered an error with the passcode sent to . Please reenter your email. Email address Continue Return to options Welcome to The Washington Sun Subscribe to maintain unlimited access to independent journalism covering Washington's people, politics and power. My Account page . Welcome to The Washington Sun Secure checkout powered by Stripe Continue to checkout ↗ By continuing, you agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy , and Subscription Agreement Terms and Conditions .