Expert opinions on AI Risk

MAP-AI, a new control-plane system architecture for aligned decision-making under uncertainty, enforces alignment through Monte Carlo estimation of outcome distributions and admissibility-controlled policy selection rather than static model-level con...

If it takes over that's what will happen. [...] We don't know how to do that. We don't even know if it's possible.

The panel cautions that there is no scientific guarantee that autonomous agents will follow their instructions and that evidence of them departing is already accumulating. Accountability and oversight must therefore be built by design and not reconst...

Compounding the problem, labs in China often release dual-use capable models as open-weight. Once a model is open-weight, safeguards that do exist can be removed, making the model available to any state or non-state actor to use for malicious purpose...

Restricting access to a dual-use AI model is precautionary only if it delays harmful actors more than defenders. That condition varies across actors: a state agency or organized criminal group may obtain a substitute through theft, distillation, inte...

Shared access to open-source AI systems is important for protection in a world where AI can be used to hack into electronic systems, like voting systems and benefits infrastructure.

I cannot exclude the possibility that future machines might regard themselves as autonomous individuals with personal preferences and aversions.

In 2005, I would have answered ‘no’ to the question of whether you could have a mind that was not biological—that existed in the substrate of silicon. Now I just don’t know.

Being open to the possibility that LLMs are conscious is the same as being open to the possibility that Microsoft Word is conscious.

We think that the smart way to balance these two truths is to allow AI developers to write their own safety standards, but require them to be transparent about what they are, so we can hold them to their own promises.

Our view is that AI is a general-purpose technology with a wide range of applications, and also that regulators understand well the sectors they are regulating. They understand the risks that are present and understand, as many noble Lords have raise...

However, we recommend against publicly releasing frontier model weights.

A safety regime that restricts legitimate defenders, while capable models remain available for attackers, creates an asymmetric disadvantage.

Post-hoc explanations have no guarantee of being faithful, because the model was never trained to make them valid. The alternative is to make interpretability part of the training contract.

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;

Achieving [human-level AGI] would have profound and far-reaching impacts on human society. ... AI progress might continue to accelerate over the next years. This could imply that the image of a single transformative step change, caused by the introdu...

Throwing more words and GPUs into the word-guessing program won't make it sentient. [...] one of our mares gives birth to a locomotive.

I would like to see a CERN for AI [...] where all the top scientists come together and see whether they can make a super intelligence. And, if they can, they contain it into a system where it can't just go out and persuade people to let it run the wo...

I call on the governments of the world to take immediate action to end this danger by permanently banning the development of artificial general intelligence and machine superintelligence.