AI Safety Camp
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Ensuring specific binding protections of human rights (including privacy, copy rights, environmental rights). Consider fundamental limits to control (see papers Roman Yampolskiy, Forrest Landry).
From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?
- Protection and promotion of human rights
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
Please briefly explain your selection.
2
Safe AI - including scoping model designs, and uses and accounting for fundamental limits to control - is needed to mitigate systemic catastrophic risks. Transparency and accountability is required to allow citizens and government bodies to protect our human rights.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
1
Undemocratic power consolidation by tech companies over citizens' lives.
How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.
Dilution of EU AI Act provisions and their implementation (e.g. allowing company violations of the GDPR and the Berne three step test). The EU promotion of the development and commercialisation of unscoped models where safety testing is intractable.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Taking human rights provisions seriously, and not condoning corporate loopholes.
What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?
Consider including Christian peace movements (e.g. the British Quakers) as bringing an important voice to the table regarding preempting reckless military tech escalation.
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
Suggest a focus on inquiry – surfacing deeper questions about the concerns and excitements people have.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
The Christian peace movement. International AI data workers (e.g. in Kenya).
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Citizen Assembly-style discussion formats Ephemeral Group Process
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
2
Having independent human rights scholars consider interpretations of human rights, both literally and in the spirit of the law, as applied to AI development, deployment, and use. Strict liability for harms, to address corporate excess.