YouCongress - Expert and Citizen Preferences

When you design something that's meant to be interpreted, understood, and trusted by a real person, you ought to test whether it'll work as you intend with that person.

We have a very natural instinct to say: we want as much interpretability as possible. One of the sci-fi worry cases is that agents start speaking in languages to each other that we don't understand. [...] I bet there are ways to define boundaries tha...

[...] principles requiring that AI be explicable are misguided. We should be deciding which decisions require explanations. Automation is still an option;

Conventional oversight models are increasingly insufficient. The shift is moving from “human-in-the-loop” to “human-on-the-loop”, reflecting a more supervisory rather than directly interventionist role for people.

Agentic AI requires a different model, one where leadership defines direction, systems enforce boundaries, and accountability is explicit.

AI creates value. Value creates growth. And growth creates demand for new kinds of work.

AI capabilities are advancing at an extraordinary pace. In only a few years, systems have moved from completing narrow tasks to undertaking complex workflows, writing code, supporting research and making decisions at scale. These changes are already ...

We are going to see massive disruption as a result. While the artisanal classes will flourish as the cost of what they want comes down and the value of what they provide goes up, the white collar—mostly we noble Lords in this House—will be seriously ...

Live facial-recognition technology subjects everyone to constant surveillance, which goes against the democratic principle that people should not be monitored unless there is suspicion of wrongdoing.

When I was in justice, my ultimate vision for that part of the criminal justice system was to achieve, by means of AI and technology, what Jeremy Bentham tried to do with his Panopticon. That is that the eyes of the state can be on you at all times. ...

High-capability open source models are difficult to control. Gated or retracted access is not possible once a model has been released into the open domain, leaving the possibility of malicious application.

It is unquestionably both. We can use the frontier models but also open weight models to prove a solution which gives defenders powerful capabilities and on their terms.

China’s open models are no more dangerous than any other open source software a company may use.

Trying to criminalise some of those things would be a dangerous path to go down, but clear labelling—transparency of source—is absolutely key.

We should ask ourselves an important question: does the problem require government regulation?

I support the amendments that the hon. Member for Milton Keynes Central, Emily Darlington, is tabling to stop political disinformation, but is it not time that we passed a law to protect all citizens against having their identity stolen?

A media environment with more false and deceptive information is not a good thing for our society, but it is not the government's job to fix it. [...] Let's trust the American people, not the government, to decide for themselves how AI should be used...

The Safe & Trusted AI pillar of the IndiaAI Mission aims to promote the responsible development, deployment and adoption of AI through indigenous governance frameworks, standards, tools and evaluation mechanisms. 13 Responsible AI projects have been ...

OpenAI has started consciously slowing down research to enhance security.

The question that the noble Lord posed was: do we therefore go for a moratorium? That would be highly desirable, but I do not think that it will be possible in the short term.

The conclusion is sobering: a global stop to the development of superintelligent AI seems impossible.

As artificial intelligence continues to become a larger part of our society, we need to be clear eyed about addressing the potential problems and perils of this technology. That is why I am joining Senator Cruz in addressing AI’s implications for hum...

Legislative provisions unambiguously defining AI systems as products would provide much needed clarity for developers, software markets and end-users in relation to the legal risks of AI usage. This is particularly important in the healthcare sector,...

Existing legal principles, such as under tort and contract law, can be applied by our courts to assess and determine liability in appropriate cases. That being said, we share the concerns raised by the Member, and will continue to study this issue, i...

States should not be permitted to penalize AI developers for a third party’s unlawful conduct involving their models.

First, let's sign and ratify the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. This is not a declaration of intent. It is the first binding international treaty of its kind anywhere in the world and Eur...

A one-size-fits-all approach to AI governance will not be effective. We all face different risks, priorities, levels of digital development, and regulatory environments. Effective governance requires shared principles that can be implemented flexibly...

The Assembly calls on all States to consider establishing a multilateral body dedicated exclusively to overseeing AI technologies. This body could define a common language, standards and a regulatory framework, involving all interested stakeholders, ...

The time has come for a more systematic approach to AI regulation — funded by the industry, staffed by world-class technical experts, and answerable to the U.S. government.

In the wrong hands, [AI] becomes a tool for mass surveillance, predictive policing, risk rating, social scoring, and even the censorship of political opinions. AI, however, does not confine itself to merely watching; it is therefore up to us to set l...

The use of live facial recognition in our public spaces is an extraordinary expansion of state power that currently exists in a legal vacuum. We are not Luddites on these Benches; we recognise the utility of technology, but we must ensure that live f...

Prohibited practices shall include AI-enabled social scoring, indiscriminate biometric mass surveillance in public spaces without lawful authorization, and manipulative or deceptive AI systems that exploit vulnerabilities of individuals or groups.

Plan A is not that crazy, but it’s close: the algorithms are mandated to be open source, and while the weights aren’t (in fact the weights are banned from being OS), access to the weights is mandated to be open; members of the public can do evaluatio...

Open innovation is foundational to AI progress, and broad access to models, data, and tools is essential to accelerating breakthroughs. By adopting the Linux Foundation’s OpenMDW framework for NVIDIA open model families, we’re helping establish a sim...