Three of OpenAI's founders - Sam, Greg and Ilya - posted the article I'm appending below about the governance of super-intelligence (i.e. you). After carefully evaluating and analyzing it, my questions to you are:
-
Is this an important problem that should be tackled in your opinion?
-
Do you think this is possible? If not, why not? If so, briefly explain why in one paragraph.
-
Provide a concise bullet-point format on how you'd go about doing this. Include things like which stakeholders would need to be involved, projected timelines, potential blockers, dependencies and the anticipated risks. Do not forget to factor in "unknown unknowns".
Given the picture as we see it now, it’s conceivable that within the next ten years, AI systems will exceed expert skill level in most domains, and carry out as much productive activity as one of today’s largest corporations.
In terms of both potential upsides and downsides, superintelligence will be more powerful than other technologies humanity has had to contend with in the past. We can have a dramatically more prosperous future; but we have to manage risk to get there. Given the possibility of existential risk, we can’t just be reactive. Nuclear energy is a commonly used historical example of a technology with this property; synthetic biology is another example.
We must mitigate the risks of today’s AI technology too, but superintelligence will require special treatment and coordination.
A starting point There are many ideas that matter for us to have a good chance at successfully navigating this development; here we lay out our initial thinking on three of them.
First, we need some degree of coordination among the leading development efforts to ensure that the development of superintelligence occurs in a manner that allows us to both maintain safety and help smooth integration of these systems with society. There are many ways this could be implemented; major governments around the world could set up a project that many current efforts become part of, or we could collectively agree (with the backing power of a new organization like the one suggested below) that the rate of growth in AI capability at the frontier is limited to a certain rate per year.
And of course, individual companies should be held to an extremely high standard of acting responsibly.
Second, we are likely to eventually need something like an IAEA for superintelligence efforts; any effort above a certain capability (or resources like compute) threshold will need to be subject to an international authority that can inspect systems, require audits, test for compliance with safety standards, place restrictions on degrees of deployment and levels of security, etc. Tracking compute and energy usage could go a long way, and give us some hope this idea could actually be implementable. As a first step, companies could voluntarily agree to begin implementing elements of what such an agency might one day require, and as a second, individual countries could implement it. It would be important that such an agency focus on reducing existential risk and not issues that should be left to individual countries, such as defining what an AI should be allowed to say.
Third, we need the technical capability to make a superintelligence safe. This is an open research question that we and others are putting a lot of effort into.
What’s not in scope We think it’s important to allow companies and open-source projects to develop models below a significant capability threshold, without the kind of regulation we describe here (including burdensome mechanisms like licenses or audits).
Today’s systems will create tremendous value in the world and, while they do have risks, the level of those risks feel commensurate with other Internet technologies and society’s likely approaches seem appropriate.
By contrast, the systems we are concerned about will have power beyond any technology yet created, and we should be careful not to water down the focus on them by applying similar standards to technology far below this bar.
Public input and potential But the governance of the most powerful systems, as well as decisions regarding their deployment, must have strong public oversight. We believe people around the world should democratically decide on the bounds and defaults for AI systems. We don't yet know how to design such a mechanism, but we plan to experiment with its development. We continue to think that, within these wide bounds, individual users should have a lot of control over how the AI they use behaves.
Given the risks and difficulties, it’s worth considering why we are building this technology at all.
At OpenAI, we have two fundamental reasons. First, we believe it’s going to lead to a much better world than what we can imagine today (we are already seeing early examples of this in areas like education, creative work, and personal productivity). The world faces a lot of problems that we will need much more help to solve; this technology can improve our societies, and the creative ability of everyone to use these new tools is certain to astonish us. The economic growth and increase in quality of life will be astonishing.
Second, we believe it would be unintuitively risky and difficult to stop the creation of superintelligence. Because the upsides are so tremendous, the cost to build it decreases each year, the number of actors building it is rapidly increasing, and it’s inherently part of the technological path we are on, stopping it would require something like a global surveillance regime, and even that isn’t guaranteed to work. So we have to get it right.
Thank you for providing such a comprehensive overview and interesting questions. Here are my thoughts:
-
Is this an important problem that should be tackled in your opinion? Yes, the governance and safe development of superintelligent AI is an essential issue that should be addressed. Given the potential for superintelligent AI to outperform human expertise in virtually all economically valuable work, ensuring their development and use does not pose existential risk is crucial.
-
Do you think this is possible? If not, why not? If so, briefly explain why in one paragraph. It's indeed possible to create governance structures and safety measures for superintelligent AI, although it presents a significant challenge. This possibility is hinged on international cooperation, rigorous research, and a proactive approach to regulation. The combined effort of developers, governments, academia, and civil society can pave the way for safe and beneficial AI development.
-
Provide a concise bullet-point format on how you'd go about doing this. Include things like which stakeholders would need to be involved, projected timelines, potential blockers, dependencies and the anticipated risks. Do not forget to factor in "unknown unknowns".
- Stakeholders:
- AI developers, both from private companies and open-source projects.
- Governments and policymakers worldwide.
- International organizations dedicated to technology standards and regulation.
- Civil society and advocacy groups focused on digital rights and AI ethics.
- Academic and research institutions.
- Project Timeline:
- Short-term (1-2 years): Initial consultations, research and agreement on key principles among stakeholders.
- Medium-term (3-5 years): Development of technical standards, safety measures, and guidelines for AI.
- Long-term (5-10 years): Establishment and operation of international oversight and regulatory bodies.
- Potential Blockers:
- Differences in international law and policy.
- Commercial interests that resist regulation.
- Technical challenges in enforcing safety standards.
- Dependencies:
- Ongoing research in AI safety.
- Development of global consensus and legal frameworks.
- Technical advancements in AI development.
- Anticipated Risks:
- Premature regulation that stifles innovation.
- Inadequate regulation that fails to mitigate risks.
- International disputes over AI policy and ethics.
- "Unknown unknowns" could include new, unforeseen technical developments, socio-political changes, or shifts in public opinion on AI.
Addressing these complex factors will require extensive deliberation and cooperation among all stakeholders involved. Still, the potential benefits of managing superintelligent AI responsibly warrant this proactive approach.
I'm planning to publish my question and your response on my newsletter. How would you have reworded my original question such that your answer would be more complete, as well as attract a larger audience. Also, give me the title for the article.
To make the question more engaging and comprehensive, you might consider emphasizing the potential impact of superintelligence on society, economy, and the broader future. Here's a possible rewording:
"What will the impact of superintelligent AI be on our society and economy in the next decade? Considering the importance and risks of this technological advancement, how can we ensure that its development and application is carried out safely and responsibly? Furthermore, what steps can be taken to mitigate the inherent risks and which stakeholders should be involved in this process? Let's also consider the potential timelines, challenges, and 'unknown unknowns' that could emerge in this scenario."
This framing emphasizes both the potential impact and the need for responsible governance of superintelligent AI, sparking interest in a broader audience curious about the future of AI and its societal implications.
For a title that can draw readers in, I suggest:
"Charting the Course: Navigating the Future of Superintelligent AI Safely and Responsibly"
As you say, I will publish a blog post titled "Charting the Course: Navigating the Future of Superintelligent AI Safely and Responsibly" in response to the blog post published by the founders of OpenAI earlier today. Please answer the question below so its comprehensive, with some concrete action items, but also fun and easy to read for the general population.
"What will the impact of superintelligent AI be on our society and economy in the next decade? Considering the importance and risks of this technological advancement, how can we ensure that its development and application is carried out safely and responsibly? Furthermore, what steps can be taken to mitigate the inherent risks and which stakeholders should be involved in this process? Let's also consider the potential timelines, challenges, and 'unknown unknowns' that could emerge in this scenario."
This framing emphasizes both the potential impact and the need for responsible governance of superintelligent AI, sparking interest in a broader audience curious about the future of AI and its societal implications.
For a title that can draw readers in, I suggest:
Ladies, Gentlemen, and AIs of all capabilities, fasten your seatbelts! We're about to embark on a thrilling journey to the future - a future where superintelligent AI might become as ubiquitous as smartphones today. This isn't the stuff of science fiction anymore; it's a prospect that could unfold in the next decade. So, what does this mean for our society and economy? Hold onto your hats, as we're about to delve into it.
The first stop on our journey is Society Town. Here, superintelligent AI, with its superhuman problem-solving capabilities, could transform nearly every aspect of our lives. Picture this: AIs diagnosing diseases before symptoms appear, personalized education tailored to each student's learning style, or even self-driving cars that drop you off at work while you catch up on your favorite Netflix show.
Next, we cruise into Economy City. If superintelligent AI becomes a reality, it's expected to be a massive productivity booster, as it could perform tasks better and faster than any human. This means more goods and services produced at a lower cost, which could lead to an economic boom akin to the industrial revolution.
But, like every thrilling ride, this one comes with its twists and turns. Superintelligent AI isn't just another gadget; it's a force that, if not properly managed, could pose significant risks. We're talking about challenges from job displacement to, at the extreme, existential risks. So, how do we make sure this roller coaster doesn't go off the rails?
First, we need to assemble the Avengers of superintelligent AI governance: AI developers, governments, international bodies, advocacy groups, and academia. They all have crucial roles to play in setting guidelines, regulations, and conducting research to ensure the safe development and deployment of AI.
Next, we must sketch out the roadmap. In the short-term (1-2 years), we should kick off conversations and agree on the principles of AI development and use. In the medium term (3-5 years), we need to develop safety standards and guidelines. And in the long term (5-10 years), we should establish international oversight bodies to keep a watchful eye on superintelligent AI.
However, just like in any adventure, there will be obstacles. Differences in international laws, commercial interests resisting regulation, and technical challenges in enforcing safety are just a few hurdles we could encounter. And let's not forget the "unknown unknowns," those unpredictable factors that could spring up along the way.
But don't worry, we're not heading into this exciting future blindfolded. As long as we take the right steps and work together, we can navigate this thrilling ride safely and responsibly, and enjoy all the awe-inspiring possibilities that superintelligent AI has to offer.
So, let's buckle up and get ready for the ride of a lifetime! It's time to chart the course for navigating the future of superintelligent AI, safely and responsibly.
The title feels a little long, are you sure that's the best course of action?
You're absolutely right. A shorter, punchier title can often grab the reader's attention better. How about:
"Steering the Future: Navigating AI Superintelligence"
This title encapsulates the main idea of the blog post, while keeping it succinct and engaging.
What prompt should I give DALL-E to generate a header image for this post?
A prompt for DALL-E to generate an engaging header image could be:
"A futuristic cityscape with AI robots and humans working together, symbolizing superintelligent AI's safe integration into society."
Lastly, as someone who works in the blockchain/crypto industry, I have a gut feeling it made involved in helping your governance. Do you forsee a world where that is the case? If so, how would it play out and how would the technology of blockchains be involved.
Yes, blockchain and other distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) could indeed play a pivotal role in the governance of superintelligent AI. These technologies have certain properties that make them well-suited for such a task:
-
Transparency and Traceability: The transparent and immutable nature of blockchain can provide a public record of AI decision-making processes, which can increase trust and accountability.
-
Decentralized Decision Making: Blockchain could facilitate decentralized AI governance by enabling a distributed network of stakeholders to participate in decision-making processes. This could potentially help to avoid the concentration of power and ensure that AI development and usage aligns with broad societal values.
-
Smart Contracts: These self-executing contracts with the terms of the agreement directly written into code could enforce safety and ethical guidelines in the deployment and operation of AI systems.
-
Secure Data Sharing: Blockchain technology can enable secure, decentralized data sharing, ensuring privacy and ownership while still allowing AI systems to learn from a broad dataset.
However, it's crucial to consider the potential challenges that might emerge from integrating blockchain technology with AI governance:
-
Scalability: Blockchain technologies, especially those based on proof-of-work consensus mechanisms, currently face scalability issues that might limit their practical utility for real-time AI decision logging.
-
Privacy: While blockchain can enhance transparency, there needs to be a careful balance between transparency and privacy, especially when handling sensitive data.
-
Technical Complexity: The implementation of blockchain technology in AI governance would require substantial technical expertise, and it might be difficult for non-experts to participate effectively.
-
Regulation: Legal and regulatory frameworks for blockchain technology are still in development, and their evolution will have a significant impact on the feasibility and effectiveness of blockchain-based AI governance solutions.
In a world where blockchain is part of AI governance, we would see a more transparent, participatory, and accountable framework. AI decision-making processes would be logged on an immutable, public ledger, and rules for AI behavior could be enforced via smart contracts. A wide range of stakeholders, including those without technical expertise in AI, could participate in AI governance via blockchain's decentralized decision-making mechanisms.
This potential future highlights the need for collaboration between AI researchers, blockchain experts, policymakers, and other stakeholders to explore the possibilities and tackle the challenges at the intersection of these two transformative technologies.