Expert opinions on Public Interest AI

The fact that both sides agreed to continue the dialogue is significant. The initial outcome - an AI risk notification mechanism - sets a precedent that other countries may follow.

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...

It seems likely that the answer looks more like setting standards for other businesses while ensuring courts and attorneys general hold AI businesses liable for foreseeable uses of their technology—including enforcing existing laws about hacking and ...

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.

Society may eventually find it useful to create a category of limited artificial legal personality without deciding that the entities enjoying it possess subjective experience. [...] Corporations already demonstrate that legal persons can enjoy only ...

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...

All of this seems great to me, and there are some things that I'm especially happy to see. Specifically, point number two: “The idea of model welfare is wrong. AIs should not have rights or legal personhood.”

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...

We need requirements on labs disclosing agent swarm exploits/events within 48 hours of lab staff gaining knowledge of them and we need them today.

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.

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...

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...

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...

While this may seem dire, none of it is inevitable. The same machines that build drones can build houses and hospitals, and within a decade or so of full automation, it would be possible to extend the living standards of a wealthy American to every h...

If AI delivers even a fraction of its potential, it could generate unprecedented abundance. We could see decades of scientific progress compressed into years, and levels of productivity growth that today seem implausible.

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 ...

While we continue to work toward a world free from both nuclear weapons and autonomous killing machines, we welcome the focus in the ongoing negotiations on ensuring ‘meaningful human control’ over autonomous weapons.

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

A total prohibition on all autonomous weapons would likely fail to distinguish between high-risk anti-personnel systems and narrowly bounded defensive systems used against incoming missiles or munitions.