Expert opinions on Policy

One of the best tools we have to ensure that is that, like, if you have a company that hurts people, you’re liable for that.

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.

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. [...] As frontier AI companies beg...

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

They really become part of the company, which makes it difficult to criticize it because the staffers become almost your friends.

Australia should require AI companies to submit to independent safety checks.

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.

While estimates of the full impact of AI on the workforce differ widely, our base estimate indicates that automation could reduce labor demand by the equivalent of roughly 36 million jobs, while growth in the AI value chain and the broader economy co...

Do artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT eliminate jobs, create new ones, or both? There’s a lot of speculation regarding this question, but little solid data in the U.S. to answer it.

In our national survey, 83% of U.S. adults expect AI to eliminate more jobs than it creates.

There is indeed a strong case for reducing the pace of AI development.

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...

I don’t see current AI as dangerous. The calls to slow down AI development are a form of marketing and lobbying. Anthropic is portraying AI as highly dangerous to scare governments. But LLMs aren’t at that level yet.

That same kind of mechanistic understanding eludes us in today’s Super Intelligence systems, even as the frontier models powering these systems are now more capable than traditional software systems. We can’t attribute model behaviors and outputs to ...

Existing responsible AI governance frameworks mandate human oversight. Yet they share a critical assumption: that competent human overseers remain present and capable of exercising meaningful oversight and control over AI decisions. Accountability mu...

A lot of tools can tell you an AI agent is behaving strangely. Very few can act on that at the network layer, without waiting on a human to approve a ticket. That’s the piece we’re closing.

I believe we were fired for prioritising safety over the near-term interests of OpenAI as a corporation.

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...

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...

Such a ruling close to Election Day would open a huge opportunity for abuse during a period where harm has outsized impact. Campaigns will use this technology to target voters in deceptive ways.

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.

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...

Australia and the US’s Western allies face an incentive and opportunity structure that may promote, and enable, the less instead of the more destructive options. [...] A government that believes access to American frontier models will remain availabl...

AI is already on the verge of going rogue, but with legal person status, it could become an actual existential threat to humanity.

We have to change the way we talk about AI risk because for a very long time, it’s either existential and everything is going to die and the killer robots are coming, or it doesn’t really matter.

We do need to have some safeguards in place to make sure there are no unintended consequences, but, no, I do not think AI is going to imperil human existence.

We need to pause all of the research on this, we need to pause all of the application of AI and just sit down and have a proper think about where this is going, where we want it to go, and how we want it to happen and how we want it to be regulated. ...

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 United States totally rejects any attempt to construct a globalist scheme of control for the artificial intelligence being spoken of so much now – hereinafter officially called super intelligence.

Across the country, Big Tech companies like Flock Safety have built a mass surveillance system to harvest Americans’ private and personal data without their consent. AI-powered cameras are keeping track of our every move and weaponizing this data aga...

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 ...

We ask them to work with the communities using this technology to decide what rules should govern it and not to spread misinformation or ban a critical public safety tool outright that is helping to make communities safer.