Google AI Czar Demis Hassabis, a leading figure in AI, warns that we are on the brink of a technological revolution. He urges immediate action to prepare for the challenges posed by Artificial General Intelligence, comparing its impact to that of electricity and fire.
Image: Ludovic Marin/AFP/Getty Images
The technologist, Demis Hassabis, behind one of the leading Artificial Intelligence (AI) labs, Google Deepmind has written an AI piece that is worthy of attention.
He helps us understand the significance of this AI moment by highlighting that this technology (Artificial General Intelligence) “cannot be compared to standard technological breakthroughs, not even ones as consequential as the internet or mobile - it is much more akin to the discovery of electricity or fire.”
I think this description of what is upon helps all of us appreciate the fact that we are on uncharted territory which requires unconventional methods to withstand it.
He goes to highlight a major risk by highlighting that “urgent action” is needed as we get closer to point where this technology will take on a more advanced nature.
What is concerning however is that in his view there’s no action being taken to prepare the world for what is coming. Instead he says “we are locked in an extremely intense, multilayered commercial and geopolitical race”
Sadly, I see something similar in South Africa.
After it was discovered that the process followed was flawed those in leadership positions have gone underground.
Even if there’s some action by academics in the public arena there’s silence about this important matter.
This is concerning, especially after we’ve observed that there’s private interests that may be influencing law makers. Hassabis makes important an recommendation to address this state of lull.
He recommends a development of a “new Standards Body modelled on a federally overseen public-private partnership or self-regulatory organisation, much like the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), with a board that includes independent leading technical experts and open-source representatives”.
He goes on to say that such a regulatory body ought to be “responsible for developing assessment protocols and working with appropriate federal agencies and the US National Labs to conduct testing in areas relevant to national security”.
He indicates that such a “model would qualify as ‘Frontier-class’ if it meets certain thresholds on a set of benchmarks determined by the Standards Body and regularly updated to keep pace with evolving AI capabilities.
He writes that those “organisations with ‘Frontier Models’ as defined by those benchmarks would be deemed ‘Frontier Labs’, and be encouraged to adopt best practices, such as publishing model cards with technical details, maintaining strong internal cybersecurity, vetting key personnel, and providing sufficient resourcing for safety and security research, and more.”
The only limitation I noted in his recommendations is that such an approach be adopted in the US. It’s an intervention that should be adopted across the world.
Countries can similar steps independently and work collaboratively with an entity at a global level. He recommends that “Frontier Labs would voluntarily share models with the Standards Body for review up to 30 days before release.
Once the assessment protocol is shown to be effective and robust, formalisation could quickly follow, meaning that Frontier Models would be required to pass it to be deployed in the US market.
Labs would also work with the Standards Body to address any critical post-release vulnerabilities.” This approach would probably have to be taken at a local level as well.
This requires some form of action sooner rather than later to be ready to form part of such a governance structure.
Due to the leadership of the US in AI he recommends a more US focused for however there’s nothing stopping the global community to create their governance structures to work together with globally established entities.
My hope is that those who are leading the need for urgency on these matters.
Hassabis concludes by saying “ we must use this precious window before AGI arrives to shape this technology for the benefit of all humanity”.
It’s an attitude that should be adopted by local leaders before it’s too late.
Wesley Diphoko is the Editor-In-Chief of FastCompany (SA) magazine and a Technology Analyst.
Wesley Diphoko is a Technology Analyst and Editor-in-Chief of Fast Company (South Africa) magazine.
Image: Supplied
Follow Business Report on Facebook, X and on LinkedIn for the latest Business and tech news.