Expert opinions on Public Interest AI

We can put these companies on notice that they’re going to be evaluated by folks that understand the process, that understand the technology, and will be transparent and hold them accountable so that they create safe products, and they don’t send out...

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.

Some people worry that giving AIs separate legal personhood would let AI companies, or bad actors using AIs, shield themselves from responsibility. But it doesn’t have to work that way… when a Walmart delivery driver runs over a pedestrian, we want t...

There is a reasonable chance, however, that if the vision for AI agents comes to pass, then for our markets and legal accountability regimes to function effectively, agents will have to have the capacity to sue and be sued directly. This is the defin...

Machines are tools, not persons. Today, some propose granting these systems rights, or even legal personhood. Such an approach risks obscuring human responsibility and leaving those who suffer harm to confront a faceless entity.

And as a first step, I suggest that interested parties and countries can come together to launch a pilot around AI incident reporting. We can start by agreeing on a common set of incident categories and information to be shared. We can explore how pa...

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...

I wish to speak in support of Amendment 41, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Harding, to which I have added my name. We heard during Committee not only about the out-of-control behaviour from agents running AI models from OpenAI, Google and Me...

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.

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...

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...

Well, I do have a fundamental belief that AI is surprising. [...] I think that the way that things will change and how what we do with our time evolves and we clearly will be in a world of abundance and how do we ensure that that abundance is broadly...

The promise of artificial general intelligence is that it will provide unprecedented productivity gains that could allow all of humanity to achieve a standard of living greater than that experienced by those in the wealthiest nations.

AGI is generally understood as an AI system that can match or exceed human capabilities on most economically valuable tasks. In such a world, the automation of work would not be limited to specific industries or routine jobs. Instead, machines would ...

Middle powers should combine complementary national assets and pool the capabilities that require scale, while preserving national and commercial control over applications, deployment, language, and sector-specific use. Shared efforts could include m...

The answer isn't convergence for its own sake. We can push too hard on one thing. But if you have one standard, you could risk a lowest common denominator outcome that can cost us the innovation system as well and might have a risk on the national in...

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.

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...