Reasons and Essays

Real Time Delphi

Collecting and Sythesizing Expert Opinioni

Please provide the rationale for your answers on the previous questionnaire page.

To submit your response

To return to the questionnaire

50/50

Row	Question	Your Rationale	Group Responses
4	In this row, considering the factors above, we ask for judgments about the effectiveness of two additional POTENTIAL UN AGI AGENCY MODELS and ask for you to describe a governance model you think will work to best manage the development and use of AGI. Please share some of your reasoning behind your judgments at the bottom of each colum.....		*() Decentralised technology will generally find a way around regulation, particularly as tech is moving way faster than regulators (in many ways attempts to regulate AI are pure theatre and far removed from the underlying technological reality). Advocating for and encouraging open source, open access, decentralised AI models above a certain level of size is likely the only way to ensure evolution happens in plain sight and counter-measures are able to evolve rapidly in response to harmful applications. Decentralised governance systems which structurally mitigate against unipolar power concentration is likely the most robust mechanism. Ultimately, again, regulation needs to be done at application level, not technology level. () Decentralized development will happen regardless of governance attempts. Bad actors will act badly. (Very high) This will probably happen anyway. I also believe that an open source, open access, decentralised AI models above a certain level of size are the best way to go, both for safety, accountability, and general accessibility. (Very low) This suggests several actors developing AGI: open-source developers, governments/militaries, and corporations. The first may proliferate widely, but the latter two will have immense resources they can bring to bear. There will therefore become a kind of class division among AGIs with this model: many free, open, trustable AGIs that individually have no power; and numerous corporate- or government-backed ones with colossal powers to act. This scenario makes me very uneasy. (Very low) It is not true that internet is not owned by anybody, this kind of oversimplifications are very dangerous. This is why the same principle is dangerous (and also inapplicable) for AI. (Low) No ownership means no accountability. (Low) This likely a highly possible outcome where it would be a decentralised system, given the how technology will progress and develop. However, regulation needs to protect use cases given the power of the technology and the many possibilities. Internet in itself is a facilitator technology for further developments, however AGI will have some aspects which are differentiating. Regulation needs to be application level and use cases, rather technology. (50/50) So much of this depends on the profitability of AGI, the speed at which it continues to develop, and the altruistic nature of developers. I give a 50/50 without some very serious foresight work. (50/50) It will be chaos... but so is the internet. It is hard to envision such model considering the current disparities in AI-competence levels between countries. (50/50) This proposal is interesting, I imagine that blockchain-based systems can be added for the transparency of this data. **(High) Decentralized emergence of AI enterprise will happen anyway. This is not the the essential criteria, the formative criteria is the rapid establishment of international consensus and the placement of an effective UN developmental tool. An open source methodology for AI platforms is very usable.

To submit your response

Please close this window to return to your place in the questionnaire.

To sign out click here

Date: 2024-05-07