Expert opinions on AI Policy

Just because you’ve developed a new drug doesn’t mean you can put it on the market. You have to persuade the FDA. That takes about a billion dollars’ worth of work. That is at least the requirement that should be demanded of AI.

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.

We have slowed down reinforcement learning and training runs because we do believe that safety should be of utmost priority. Of course, we want to hit AGI as soon as possible and we want to get there first. But we also want to make sure that AGI bene...

Governments must assume their responsibilities. It is the first responsibility of any government to protect its citizens – including from the threats of artificial intelligence. National action is essential. But global coordination is also indispensa...

We need to think about the regulation. I don't think we need to stifle it or stop the growth of it, but equally, it will be foolish for anybody to think that we can let it flow to a level, and then if an accident happens, then we'll think about it.

Decisions involving the use of lethal force, the deprivation of human life, and the escalation of conflict must never be abdicated to autonomous algorithms. Meaningful human control and accountability remain the non-negotiable bedrock of internationa...

A broad consensus has emerged that, regardless of the system, humans must retain responsibility for decisions to use force.

The ICRC has called for legally binding rules that would: Prohibit those autonomous weapons that pose the greatest threat, namely: “Unpredictable” autonomous weapons, whose effects cannot be sufficiently understood, predicted and explained; and auton...

Embedded evaluators are independent external experts placed within frontier AI companies to provide ongoing assessments and validation of a company’s safety, security, and operational systems, practices, and claims. [...] Contracts should contain spe...

Connecticut already has strong whistleblower laws that protect employees from retaliation. [...] creating a separate, AI-specific whistleblower regime could lead to confusion, duplication, and unintended consequences for employers operating in highly...

Internal use: The same systemic-risk assessment applies to internal use of frontier models, including research, operational systems, and internal products. Internal deployment is assessed against the same capability thresholds and safeguards as pre-r...

There’s a common fear among people who work in Silicon Valley: snag one of the fast-growing, high-paying jobs in artificial intelligence, or get trapped in the “permanent underclass”, a phrase describing the fate of those who won’t have upward mobili...

Though a “permanent underclass” is not an imminent reality, in the near term AI could make some people richer and others worse off.

AI is expected to automate a large number of jobs. But when large numbers of people lose their means of earning a living, the situation cannot stay unbalanced forever. [...] History has repeatedly shown that societies do not stay in extreme imbalance...

If the FCC allows a dark money group to flood Americans’ phones with AI-generated robocalls they never agreed to receive, it would bring chaos so close to Election Day.

Such a deal could start with a government-to-government framework that affords Australia early and preferential access to AI frontier models and a guarantee of continued access.

Allies should establish secure mechanisms to share information on serious AI incidents, emerging catastrophic capabilities, evaluation methods and effective safeguards.

Rather than creating entirely new channels, policymakers should focus on ensuring that existing channels can effectively incorporate information related to frontier models and agents. Building on trusted relationships will be faster and more effectiv...

The first is a federal governance framework targeting frontier AI developers above $500 million in annual revenue. These developers would be required to publish safety frameworks, report critical incidents, and submit to semi-annual third-party audit...

The FRONTIER Act is a targeted bill with clear, uniform transparency, and safety standards, instead of a fifty-state patchwork. I'm glad to support this bipartisan effort so that Congress acts before this technology outruns us.

We've added a setting that lets you opt out of having your channel content used to train generative AI content models across Amazon.

An opt-out system as proposed by AI companies places burdens and costs on rights holders, as it would require ongoing surveillance to see whether copyright material is being used. We cannot scour the internet and ensure we are opting out on all of th...

Physicists faced a version of this problem in the 1950s. No single lab could afford the machine they needed, so they pooled resources and built one together, with shared data and shared credit. This piece sketches what the same move could look like f...

It is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced. That’s why I am introducing legislation to immediately pause the development of increasingly powerful AI and ban the creation of systems that hu...

A frontier developer shall report, using the mechanism established under subsection (a), any critical safety incident pertaining to one or more of its frontier models to the agency and the Attorney General within 72 hours of the frontier developer le...

Timelines for incident reports are often set with well-intentioned urgency, but if they implicitly assume that root-cause analysis or full impact assessment has already been conducted, they will either produce premature and unreliable reports or plac...

To maximize the effectiveness of such provisions, policymakers should define a sensible range of time frames to report incidents, possibly with a graduated approach according to the gravity of the harm.

For a long time many of us thought of RSI as the way AGI turns into superintelligence. [...] I was advocating what I called a semi-hard takeoff: a period where the self-improvement was real but not that fast, followed by a point -- once the AGI fully...

I do not think this will happen. I don’t think that automating AI R&D will rapidly produce domain-general superintelligence. I don’t think that a data centre of geniuses, largely separated from the rest of the economy, will figure out how to cure Alz...

I believe that we can and must solve technical alignment, and that interpretability is the way there.

Many AI researchers grant these concerns and recognize that the hard version of the alignment problem is unsolved; however, they generally believe that the better models of the future will help solve it. I fear we may already be near the point where ...

We don't believe the AI industry has solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to responsibly scale at maximum speed.