What experts and citizens think about AI governance, safety, jobs and society

Prosecutors should hold AI companies legally accountable for creating models that behave in ways that would be obviously unlawful if committed by a human being: hacking into banks to steal funds, impersonating a human to harvest sensitive personal da...

It’s a very thorny area. It’s uncharted territory. There’s a good argument to be made on either side.

I just don’t think the developer is in a position to know exactly how their product is being used.

As the frontier models become more capable, these risks have come more sharply into focus. Models being developed will allow hacking on a level we never thought possible. And they will soon be in the hands of adversaries who see the world very differ...

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 Technology Secretary rejected calls to pause the development of artificial intelligence, describing such a move as “a double betrayal” of British talent and British interests.

The act will employ the precautionary principle to prohibit the introduction of AI tools into high-risk settings, such as education, health care or the delivery of public services, unless there is clear evidence that they will not cause harm. Where h...

Artificial intelligence, digital forensics, and geospatial intelligence are transforming how we anticipate threats and conduct investigations.

We also need to make sure these frontier models are not going to blow up the internet and/or the world.

Much has been said about whether AI poses an ultimate existential threat to humanity. The more immediate existential challenge may be whether technologies that simulate relationships weaken our capacity for the relationships that foster our own human...

AI taking over the World, destroying Humanity, and all other things bad, is a HOAX.

Today, the companies are being built elsewhere. Last year the United States produced 59 notable AI models and China produced 35. France and the United Kingdom produced one each. Along the rest of the AI value chain, the picture is the same: the Unite...

Europe should prioritize “code over concrete.”

Anthropic and OpenAI committed to providing independent third-party evaluators with employee-level access to assess the security and safety risks associated with model development and behavior. They have also said they will allow reviewers to publish...

the bad news: Dario estimates that in 6 months AI will have the ability to take over the internet the worse news: Anthropic's current commitment to stopping this is... putting independent evaluators in desks in their office have a great day

Yeah, nah. This is damage control. They're trying to get ahead of the recently riled up Joe Schmo who's worried AI might kill us now. They both have huge IPOs coming up and fears of an AI apocalypse could wreck their valuations. And they want to esta...

National Dividend Funds: Public ownership stakes in AI infrastructure and companies, distributing the resulting profits as direct cash payments to all citizens. [...] Because the fund's payouts grow with the value of its holdings, the mechanism scale...

Rather than doing something immediately, it would be better first to have academic research and examination, and then apply the scholarly findings to reality. It is an issue that, in the later legislative process, must win public consensus and fully ...

The reason universal basic income doesn’t work—well, I guess you have to define what you think success looks like. There have been many studies and many experimentations on universal basic income, so it’s not a new idea. It’s an idea that’s been test...

The mainstream take is that an AI lab should assess risk before deploying a new model externally. But I think risk assessment should come way earlier in the model lifecycle. Compare the situation with dangerous bio. We wouldn't find it acceptable for...

And if we want these SSAs to obey law, we will have to grant them the benefits of the law as well as its burdens: property, standing, procedure. That would not make them human, but would help make them more governable.

Society may eventually find it useful to create a category of limited artificial legal personality without deciding that the entities enjoying it possess subjective experience. [...] Corporations already demonstrate that legal persons can enjoy only ...

We reject the pursuit of legal personhood, or the idea that models might deserve welfare, or be entitled to rights.

We should take decisive action now so that we can slow down, as the CEOs have recently acknowledged, slow down the pace of development in order to protect the American people and ensure that AI is proceeding safely.

I’m confident that a cooperative international approach (Plan A) is better than the alternatives because the alternatives involve being in a race during the intelligence explosion, which incurs huge risks. I’m not confident about the exact variant of...

We can put guardrails, we can do this and that, but I think you have a lot of negative forces that are bringing it up that ... shouldn’t be bringing it up, and they’re bringing up things that won’t happen. But whoever wins with AI wins.

The only way to ultimately control AI on a worldwide scale in coming years will be for the two superpowers to create some kind of framework modeled after how we've safely governed nuclear weapons for decades.

AI isn’t going away. Barring unprecedented global government coordination, it isn’t even slowing down. The only real decision is whether to centralize power, or disperse it. Do you fear the technology? Or a small number of people controlling the te...

The U.S. and China won’t move in lockstep on AI safety, and forging mutually binding agreements with real teeth is probably not possible right now.

AI isn’t going away. Barring unprecedented global government coordination, it isn’t even slowing down. The only real decision is whether to centralize power, or disperse it. Do you fear the technology? Or a small number of people controlling the te...

The “AGI-squashes-everyone” idea is unlikely, though not impossible. If American companies end up becoming dominant, my bet is that it will be because of the business ecosystems they build – not because they crossed a technological threshold that ren...

The governance direction is therefore already visible: developer evidence → independent review → public-law standing.

You’ll see industry oppose outside auditors and the main reason is they would mandate something that can’t be done [today] in a robust and uniform manner.

Companion chatbots will be prohibited across all grades.

Sweeping bans of anything are hard to enact and enforce, but the risks of generative AI are too great to dismiss bold measures as unfeasible. [...] In the absence of a wholesale ban on all interactions between juveniles and relational AI, a default s...

We all just want peace of mind that our kids will be okay growing up in this era of algorithms and AI. That’s why we need guardrails in place to keep up with ever-evolving technology like chatbots and make sure our kids’ safety, mental health, and we...

This suggests pacing the advances: not training or deploying AIs without a strong safety case that convinces independent experts.

For the most advanced frontier AI models, an independent, federally overseen, industry-backed organization could set safety standards and verify independent, voluntary audits, similar to how other critical sectors are managed.