| > To "avoid enabling uses of AI or AGI that harm humanity or unduly concentrate power" what does one do with an idea or line of research that could potentially harm humanity or unduly concentrate power? You don't publish it : See Pandora's box.
You secure it.
You demonstrate its capability and you focus public critical discussion from then on with the creators of it along with a panel of individuals who can probe areas of concern.
Public discussion and welcomed inquiry
Private and protected research and IP. > The manipulation of social media by foreign actors armed with dumb-AI / automation was an obvious conclusion to many of us well before the Snowden leaks, but what could we do exactly? Before foreign, there was domestic and manipulation was a central concept at the inception of these platforms. Data collection and selling for profit is aimed at manipulation. What human beings could do is be honest with themselves and others for once and stop using their intellectual capacity to manipulate, dumb, and screw others over for profit. You can't engage in negative foundations and expect positive outcomes. You can't manipulate the truth and information and pretend like its going to benefit society. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt is a manipulative business tactic and it remains at the heart of the 'safety' problem and the nonsensical doomsday AI scenarios. Certain well funded groups and deep pockets have invested heavily in weakAI and it sits nicely with their legacy business models and they're scared of a truly disruptive technology eating their lunch. So, they concoct disinformation campaigns to steer resources/attention away from such dev groups and back into their coffers. > I was privately concerned about the mass weaponization of autonomous devices via cyber attack for over a year and a half and got nowhere just emailing politicians or public safety departments. Money and Power and strong motivators for some. Everything else is secondary. Many human beings like to craftily use marketing/politics to convince people otherwise, but its just a mask of their true intent. Engage your intellect and you can quickly filter through the b.s to one's true motivations/intent... Hint : their actions not their words will be aligned accordingly. > I've been told almost a dozen times that I should join a military or IR think tank but I don't want to do that. I just want someone else to vet the idea or research and pass it on to policy makers that will actually do something proactively. Money&Power. This is what dominates the world. The suggestion to join the appropriate groups which recognize this and attempt to mitigate negative effects is well founding. > What is the responsible disclosure process for ideas and research around AI? You don't publish it : See Pandora's box.
You secure it.
You demonstrate its capability and you focus public critical discussion from then on with the creators of it along with a panel of individuals who can probe areas of concern.
Public discussion and welcomed inquiry
Private and protected research and IP. So, you make the world aware that something indeed exist because you created it. You open up things for public discussion so people can work through all the issues/concerns/etc with the most knowledge group 'the creators' of it. The tech is privately secured and development goes forward with the public commentary having been received. The End. This is possibly the best format for things. Other approaches lend themselves to politics, b.s, and manipulation. |