Expert opinions on AI Regulation

The way to get there is a shared machine-readable format. I call it a Safety Framework Card.

Countries should not restrict open-weight AI models.

The physical foundations of frontier artificial intelligence, the fabrication of advanced semiconductors and the operation of computing infrastructure at the largest scales, shall be subject to international transparency, so that the concentration of...

According to the proposed rule, a covered US person will be required to provide quarterly reports to BIS if the US person “engages in, or plans, within six months, to engage in ‘applicable activities.’” “Applicable activities” include: “Conducting a...

Policymakers do not need to approach each innovation in isolation and should not treat every emerging technology as a first-of-its-kind policy problem.

Companion chatbots will be prohibited across all grades.

Children have given us a clear diagnosis of the problem. They aren't asking us to block AI innovation, but it shouldn't be a case of cleaning up the mess after harm has happened either.

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 is not something in the public interest. I think law enforcement needs to have tools to keep communities safe. Flock cameras are not a tool that I support.

This has effectively given police a very long leash to experiment with these technologies. And now we're in a tipping point situation where it's about to be expanded all over the country, and there's a real necessity for those legal frameworks to be ...

The new legal framework must include a meaningful regulatory regime which operationalises principles such as necessity, responsibility, proportionality, transparency, accountability and lawfulness. These principles should then structure and constrain...

But if governments don’t invest in the safety infrastructure now, public trust will erode, and the opportunity to leverage benefits from AI will go away, and then we’re looking at deepening inequality.

Future risk reports, system cards and external evaluations should be assessed for reproducible methods, clear separation between simulated and real actions, disclosure of missed detections, and evidence that safety interventions do not simply make pr...

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.

It is really important, given the stakes, that people who develop AI and those who test it don’t have relationships with each other.

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.

The following practices are mapped to Australia’s 8 AI Ethics Principles, demonstrating how governments can practically apply them to their assurance of AI. [...] Governments should identify and consult with stakeholders, including subject matter and...

For funders and international community: support and/or collaborate with local actors best placed to detect AI harm, and back efforts to establish cross-border AI incident information sharing.

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...

What humanity needs is an international AI nonproliferation treaty.

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.

What humanity needs is an international AI nonproliferation treaty.

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.

Market forces will make adoption go faster and faster and, unless we intervene, there will be fewer good jobs available and the benefits will accrue to a small group.

Employees are being told AI will transform the way they work, yet many have received little training on how to use it effectively, securely or confidently. The people who are most confident with AI will continue to build skills and productivity, whil...

But each time humanity has come out with more people sharing greater prosperity, health, and freedom. We believe this will be true with AI as well, and the abundance of the future can be shared by everyone.

But even a country that gets its own house in order will still be exposed to risks that cross borders. This is why an international organization will need to be built in parallel. […] A new global organization for AI will need elements of all three a...

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.

We cannot allow America to become a surveillance state where a handful of AI oligarchs profit by giving the government the power to track our every movement.

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...

I have grave concerns that banning technology until it is legislated will choke innovation, it will drive genuine use cases away, and as technology is always developing, are we not in danger of ‘tomorrow never comes’ when it comes to legislation keep...

I believe we should tax AI tokens and robots. [...] The tax system nudges you toward replacing people with machines.

The proposals differ in detail, but they cite the same story: Labor’s share of national income has declined, and AI is accelerating workers’ losses by shifting more economic activity to capital. The tax code makes all of this worse by undertaxing cap...