Write a paragraph about AI governance.


Answer: The AI arms race is heating up, and breakthroughs are happening at an accelerating pace.

The release of ChatGPT by OpenAI represents a profound leap forward in how humans interface with machines, showcasing the startling progress in large language models. Meanwhile generative AI capabilities such as Dall-E, Stable Diffusion, and Midjourney are able to generate highly realistic and detailed images from text descriptions, demonstrating a level of creativity and imagination that was once thought to be exclusively human.

Humans seem fundamentally wired to continuously advance technology and improve our knowledge and capabilities. Also, the human brain tends to think linearly, causing us to underestimate the exponential progress of technology. Companies and nations are incentivized by market forces and geopolitical game theory to pursue better intelligence through the advancement of AI.

The Future of Life Institute recently published Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter. The letter — with notable signatories including Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak and Andrew Yang — caused a stir, calling for a 6 month pause on advanced AI development:

“Therefore, we call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This pause should be public and verifiable, and include all key actors. If such a pause cannot be enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium.”

Much of the media and public discourse in response to this letter has focused on who signed it and pushing back on the notion that humanity faces an imminent existential threat of artificial superintelligence. Dystopian claims of runaway artificial intelligence seem hyperbolic to many people, and calling for a 6 month moratorium is not realistic. Good luck convincing China to “pause” their efforts in the AI arms race.

But are there no boundaries? Should we proceed with no guidelines?

For example …

Are we comfortable outsourcing decisions to black box AI systems that lack transparency and explainability, making it impossible for humans to understand the reasoning behind decisions?
Should we be worried about the development of AI-powered autonomous weapons that make decisions about the use of lethal force without human input?
Should we be worried about the potential for malicious actors to use AI for nefarious purposes, such as sophisticated propaganda campaigns?
Are our current laws, regulations and political systems equipped to handle the rapid influx of new AI alignment questions that society will grapple with in the very near future?
As AI becomes more advanced, it may become difficult to understand, which could lead to unintended outcomes. AI systems can behave in ways that are unforeseen and difficult to control. The AI alignment problem is a societal challenge that requires collaboration between researchers, engineers, entrepreneurs, policymakers, and the public. It will also require international cooperation between governments and the private sector. This is not just a technical challenge, but also a philosophical and ethical one.

The open letter mentioned above goes on to recommend:

“AI research and development should be refocused on making today’s powerful, state-of-the-art systems more accurate, safe, interpretable, transparent, robust, aligned, trustworthy, and loyal.”

This is certainly a worthy goal, and it can be achieved by doing AI in the open. What we currently lack is a framework. Society needs a set of procedures and protocols to make the recommendation from The Future of Life Institute actionable.

Jointly, we must consider and debate the pros and cons of many ideas, including but not limited to:

Mandatory disclosure of model details, including training datasets, evaluation methodologies, and known biases
Development of a framework that establishes model monitoring and audit requirements for advanced AI systems
Implementation of laws that impose liability for AI-caused harm
Establishment of a regulatory authority for oversight and tracking of highly capable AI systems
The first step in achieving a productive framework for safe AI development is an open dialogue among the many stakeholders involved, which includes everyone. We must rise above the hyper-politicized discourse that our dishonest and broken media often forces upon us. This topic is too important and the ramifications are too profound. Join me in advocating for an intelligent and respectful conversation on AI — one that solicits input and open debate from a diverse set of voices to help ensure a path forward that is in our collective best interest.