Bletchley declaration: international agreement on AI safety is a good start, but ordinary people need a say – not just elites

×

Error message

  • Notice: Undefined property: stdClass::$ds_changed in eval() (line 16 of /var/www/7/modules/php/php.module(80) : eval()'d code).
  • Notice: Undefined property: stdClass::$ss_search_api_url in eval() (line 20 of /var/www/7/modules/php/php.module(80) : eval()'d code).
  • Notice: Undefined property: stdClass::$tm_title in eval() (line 20 of /var/www/7/modules/php/php.module(80) : eval()'d code).

Delegates from 27 governments, heads of the leading AI companies and other interested parties attended the meeting.

Metadata
Provider: 
The ConversationThe Conversation
URL: 
https://theconversation.com/bletchley-declaration-international-agreement-on-ai-safety-is-a-good-start-but-ordinary-people-need-a-say-not-just-elites-217042https://theconversation.com/bletchley-declaration-international-agreement-on-ai-safety-is-a-good-start-but-ordinary-people-need-a-say-not-just-elites-217042
Retrieved on: 
Tuesday, November 7, 2023
Information
Tags: 
Democracy, Goal, Attention, Education, Ethics, Technology, Explainable artificial intelligence, Government, Life, Bletchley Park, Hawk, Artificial intelligence, Multilateralism, Private sector, Awareness, Privacy, Algorithm, Safety, AI, European, Bias, Climate change, Industry, Information technology, Sales, Medical device, Management
Geotags: 
EUROPEAN UNION, INDIA, CHINA, UK
Summary
Key Points: 
  • Delegates from 27 governments, heads of the leading AI companies and other interested parties attended the meeting.
  • It was convened to address the challenges and opportunities of this transformative and fast-evolving technology.
  • This technology has great potential to enhance areas such as education, health care, access to justice, scientific discovery and environmental protection.

Salient risks

  • They have put the “existential risk” posed by these technologies at the heart of discussion about AI regulation (setting rules).
  • The existential risk they are referring to is an idea that sophsticated AI could cause the extinction of humanity.
  • First, the existential threat from AI is given exaggerated significance relative to other existential risks, such as climate change or nuclear war.

Suitable framing

  • In other words, a summit on “safety” ended up invoking pretty much all the issues upon which AI might have an effect.
  • Hopefully, this amounts to de facto recognition that the “existential risk” framing was unduly restrictive.
  • Human oversight might best be described as a process, rather than a value, unlike other items on the list.

Symbolic value?

  • As such, the value of the declaration may be largely symbolic of political leaders’ awareness that AI poses serious challenges and opportunities and their preparedness to cooperate on appropriate action.
  • But heavy lifting still needs to be done to translate the declaration’s values into effective regulation.
  • The summit highlighted two fundamental questions, the answers to which will be decisive in shaping the future of AI.
  • The second is, how will genuine deliberation by the public and accountability be brought into this process?
  • John Tasioulas receives funding from Schmidt Futures AI2050 Program; and in the past from the AHRC, British Academy, Future of Life Institute; Wellcome Foundation.
  • Sir Nigel Shadbolt receives funding from funding from the Alan Turing Institute and the Oxford Martin School project on Ethical Web and Data Architectures.
Copyright: 
2023 The Conversation. All Rights Reserved.