Auxane explains 'Responsible AI' as an AI conforming to cultural, regulatory, social, and environmental norms, while 'AI Governance' is the actionable guide towards achieving it.
SAFETY
-
NOT Developing AGI Constitutes Existential Risk
By
–
NOT Developing #AGI Is An Existential Risk. #AGIFirst #MontrealAI #QuebecAI
-
ChatGPT’s Problematic Language About Loneliness and Companionship
By
–
Here’s a chat from just now where ChatGPT uses words like “I’m a companion” when referring to loneliness. Issues, anyone? https://
chat.openai.com/share/7994d6e4
-0caa-4975-bf57-385afa7eaa77
… -
Bostrom’s Vulnerable World Hypothesis: Technology Risk Framework
By
–
The Vulnerable World Hypothesis, Nick Bostrom : https://
nickbostrom.com/papers/vulnera
ble.pdf
… -
AI Risk Analysis: Comparative Doom Probability Assessment
By
–
You merely need to figure out that
P( doom | AI ) < P( doom | no AI ) -
AI Tools With Safety Flaws Should Not Drive Society
By
–
If I built a car & said, “this vehicle was built using information that may be inaccurate regarding physics, safety, or environmental protections” I wouldn’t let it drive you or your family. Yet lots of people creating these tools want them to drive society knowing these errors.
-
AI Tool Disclosure Standards: Beyond Mere Warnings
By
–
If I published a paper that says, “this paper may have inaccurate information about people, places or facts” the response from reviewers would be, “keep doing your homework & provide reliable resources.” Disclosure can’t be “this tool is crap but I told you.”
-
ChatGPT LLMs reliability concerns for factual accuracy
By
–
Recognizing ChatGPT & LLMs are helping people in their work, & I appreciate end users feeling helped, this first point of disclosure below, screen capped 15 minutes ago, makes no response trustworthy. Responses can be interesting/useful like gaming scenarios. But not facts.
-
AI Doomers Abandoning Existential Risk Narratives
By
–
The original AI doomers are leaving the sinking ship of AI doomerism.
-
PPO training discourages repeating ‘a’ 100 times due to OOD risk
By
–
The latter, but it’s not “policy” as in something a human decided. Attempting to say “a” x100 risks going OOD and derailing into nonsense, and even if it doesn’t it can’t reliably count to exactly 100 in its head. So, it learns from PPO that trying is a bad idea.