Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent veto of California’s Senate Bill (SB) 1047, known as the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, reignited the debate about how best to regulate the rapidly evolving field of artificial intelligence. Newsom’s veto illustrates a cautious approach to regulating a new technology and could pave the way for more pragmatic AI safety policies.
An emerging body of research suggests that large language models (LLMs) can “deceive” humans by offering fabricated explanations for their behavior or concealing the truth of their actions from human users. The implications are worrisome, particularly because researchers do not fully understand why or when LLMs engage in this behavior.
I was excited to contribute to a group of over 20 prominent AI researchers, legal experts, and tech industry leaders from institutions including OpenAI, the Partnership on AI, Microsoft, the University of Oxford, a16z crypto, and MIT on a paper proposing "personhood credentials" (PHCs) as a potential solution to the growing challenge of AI-powered online deception. PHCs would provide a privacy-preserving way for individuals to verify their humanity online without disclosing personal information. While implementation details remain to be determined, the core concept warrants serious consideration from policymakers and tech leaders as AI capabilities rapidly advance, threatening to erode the trust and accountability essential for societies to function.
The increasing capabilities of AI have sparked an important debate: Should the "weights" that define a model's intelligence be openly accessible or tightly controlled? This article dives deep into the arguments on both sides. Proponents say open-weight models accelerate innovation, enable greater scrutiny for safety, and democratize AI capabilities. Critics warn of risks like misuse for disinformation or military purposes by adversaries. The piece examines recent developments like frontier open-weight models from Meta and Mistral, Mark Zuckerberg's case for openness, concerns about China's AI ambitions, and the US government's cautious approach.
The recent AI policy roadmap from the bipartisan AI working group in Congress strikes a thoughtful balance between promoting AI innovation and addressing potential risks. It lays out a nuanced approach including increased AI safety efforts, crucial investments in domestic STEM talent, protections for children in the age of AI, and "grand challenge" programs to spur breakthroughs - all while avoiding hasty overregulation that could stifle progress
