Yoshua Bengio

In order to reduce the probability of someone intentionally or unintentionally bringing about a rogue AI, we need to increase governance and we should consider limiting access to the large-scale generalist AI systems that could be weaponized, which would mean that the code and neural net parameters would not be shared in open-source and some of the important engineering tricks to make them work would not be shared either. Ideally this would stay in the hands of neutral international organizations (think of a combination of IAEA and CERN for AI) that develop safe and beneficial AI systems that could also help us fight rogue AIs. (source)

I strongly disagree with the notion that we will have a general AI system more capable than any living human in every respect by 2028. While AI research has made significant strides, creating a system with such comprehensive abilities involves overcoming immense scientific and technical challenges. We are far from understanding the complexities of human cognition in a way that would allow us to replicate or surpass it in all respects within such a short timeframe.

As a leader in the field of artificial intelligence, I strongly believe that AI-generated political advertising must be disclosed. Transparency is crucial to maintaining the integrity of democratic processes and ensuring that voters are fully informed about the sources of the information they receive.

As AI technology rapidly advances, the concentration of power in a few private firms poses significant risks to society. Nationalizing AI firms ensures that these technologies are developed and managed in the public's best interest, with proper oversight and accountability.

I believe that the development of emotion-detecting AI should be strictly regulated. These technologies have the potential to deeply affect individual privacy and emotional well-being. Without clear ethical guidelines and oversight, we risk misuse and the erosion of personal freedoms.

I believe it is crucial for big AI companies to allocate significant resources towards AI safety. Given the potential risks associated with advanced AI systems, dedicating a third of compute resources to ensuring safety can help mitigate unforeseen consequences and align AI development with human values.

I believe third-party audits should be mandatory for major AI systems. As these systems increasingly impact society, it's crucial to ensure they are safe, ethical, and unbiased through transparent and independent evaluations.

Releasing Spanish data into the public domain is a crucial step for enhancing the performance and accessibility of Spanish language models. This openness will not only democratize access to large-scale linguistic resources but also foster innovation and inclusivity in AI development. As we strive to build AI that benefits humanity, ensuring linguistic diversity in technology is fundamental.

I believe that AI transparency is crucial for trust. As AI becomes more integrated into society, it must be held to account for its decisions. Ensuring that AI systems can provide explanations for their decisions is essential in fostering trust and understanding, especially in critical areas like healthcare or justice.

As an AI researcher, I believe that liberalism can be effective in a world with AI superintelligence. Safeguards and ethical frameworks must be implemented to ensure AI benefits humanity and upholds democratic values.

I believe that AGI, while having the potential to significantly impact various sectors, will not necessarily create abundance. The economic and social structures need to be adjusted to ensure that the benefits of AGI are distributed equally, rather than exacerbating existing inequalities.

I believe AI can lead to a concentration of power, as its development and deployment require significant resources, often available only to a few large tech companies. This concentration can exacerbate existing inequalities, so we must work to democratize AI research and ensure its benefits are broadly distributed.

I believe that no single lab should control the development of artificial superintelligence (ASI). Competition encourages innovation and ensures that multiple perspectives and approaches are explored, which is crucial for developing safe and ethical AI. An open and collaborative environment will better address global concerns and distribute the benefits of ASI more equitably.

As an AI researcher, I believe that allowing the proliferation of open-weight models capable of recursive self-improvement poses significant risks. Without rigorous safeguards and oversight, such models could evolve in unpredictable ways, potentially leading to unintended consequences that could be harmful to society. We need to prioritize safety and ethical guidelines in AI development.

I believe that AI labs should be required to pause training if AI Safety Institutes detect signs that we are losing control. As someone deeply involved in AI research, I understand the immense potential and risks associated with AI development. Ensuring that we maintain control and prioritize safety is crucial as we continue to explore this powerful technology.

As an AI researcher, I firmly believe that it is crucial for all of us to actively participate in shaping the future of AI and preparing for the post-artificial general intelligence era. This collaborative effort will help ensure ethical development, transparency, and beneficial outcomes for humanity.

As a scientist deeply involved in AI development, I believe we must be mindful of the broader implications of our work. It is irresponsible to pursue advancements at the risk of destabilizing international politics. Our focus should be on ensuring that AI contributes positively to society and global stability.

While neural interfaces hold potential for enhancing human-computer interaction, I don't believe they will inherently ease the challenge of AI alignment. The core issue is ensuring that AI systems understand and respect human values and intents, which is more about the algorithms and principles behind AI than the interfaces we use to communicate with them.

While I appreciate the intent behind the EU AI Act to regulate artificial intelligence, I believe it may hinder technological innovation and the competitive edge in AI research. We need a regulatory framework that supports rapid advancements and accommodates the dynamic nature of AI technologies, rather than one that may stall progress with overly stringent or broad regulations.

While I recognize that the expansion of large language models contributes significantly to the field of AI, I believe it is a crucial step toward achieving artificial general intelligence. Such models improve our understanding of natural language processing and can simulate human-like reasoning, which is essential for AGI. However, this expansion must be coupled with advancements in other areas of AI to fully realize AGI.

I believe that AI has the potential to be used for predicting criminal behavior, provided it is implemented with strict ethical guidelines and oversight. The benefits of preventing crime can be significant, but we must ensure that the technology is used fairly and does not perpetuate existing biases or infringe on individual privacy rights.

I believe that open-source AI fosters collaboration, transparency, and ethical development practices. With proper oversight and regulations, open-source AI can actually reduce the risks associated with AI development compared to closed-source systems.

While the development of AGI is significant, I believe the transition to superintelligence is not as imminent as some suggest. The path to superintelligence involves intricate challenges, including ethical considerations, technological limitations, and safety protocols. These complexities require careful handling and robust research, suggesting that superintelligence may not quickly follow the onset of AGI.