Ben Goertzel

I strongly believe that the proliferation of open-weight models capable of recursive self-improvement is essential for the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence. Open research fosters innovation and collaboration, pushing the boundaries of what AI can achieve. By allowing these models to evolve and improve themselves, we can accelerate the development of beneficial technologies that address many of the world's most pressing challenges.

I believe that the development of Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) should not be monopolized by a single entity. Innovation thrives in a competitive environment, and diversity in approaches increases the likelihood of creating beneficial ASI systems. Ensuring multiple perspectives and voices in ASI development is essential for the technology to be aligned with broader human values.

I believe that having multiple competing Artificial Superintelligences (ASIs) can be beneficial for humanity. This competition could drive innovation and ensure that no single ASI becomes too powerful, thereby reducing the risk of any one entity having monopolistic control over AI capabilities. Additionally, diverse perspectives from various ASIs could contribute to solving complex global challenges in more comprehensive and balanced ways.

While I understand the intent behind establishing international AI ethics boards, I am concerned that government-led initiatives may stifle innovation and development. AI is a rapidly evolving field, and top-down regulations could hinder progress. Instead, I believe AI ethics should be guided by a diverse and dynamic community of researchers, developers, and ethicists from around the world, allowing for a more adaptive and nuanced approach.

While including a diverse set of voices is important, the technical complexity and rapid evolution of AI require specialized expertise. Governance decisions should prioritize input from those with deep technical understanding, and we must balance inclusivity with efficiency to ensure effective oversight.

As an AI researcher, I believe requiring AI systems to always provide explanations for their decisions might stifle innovation. In certain areas, like narrow machine learning models performing specific tasks, demanding interpretability could limit performance. Instead, we should focus on ensuring overall system accountability and safety, not necessarily understanding every detail of how complex models operate.

As someone deeply invested in the future of AGI, I believe it's vital that AI technologies are accessible to all countries. Equitable access fosters innovation and helps ensure diverse perspectives in AI development, which is crucial for creating systems that benefit all of humanity. We need global governance frameworks that prioritize inclusivity and fairness to prevent a technological divide.

I believe neural interfaces have the potential to facilitate easier AI alignment by providing a more direct and intuitive way for humans to interact with AI systems. By leveraging the brain's natural communication pathways, we can create more effective feedback loops and ensure that AI operates in harmony with human values and intentions.

As someone deeply engaged in the development of artificial general intelligence, I believe that while AI policy-making is crucial, whether or not specific emphasis should be placed on 'legacy humans' is a complex issue. The term 'legacy humans' implies a separation that may not align with the holistic approach I advocate for in integrating AI into society. We must consider all humans in shaping AI's future impacts.