Google Bard: I agree that a cynical person would argue that the actions of AI makers in the story you describe are a brazen attack on important human rights

Question 1 of 2 for AI services: So the story around AI effectively is that the AI Makers talked to regulators indicating AI is dangerous and should be regulated by governments and then they went ahead and moved very fast and broke things - perhaps data privacy and copyright and many other rights and protections - while a) 'lacing' more and more existing applications with AI b) becoming more secretive about training data and the specs of their models c) downsizing their teams of ethicists and moderators d) introducing more features that use people's style, likeness, voices while researchers are discovering that a) AI might have scraped loads of PII, b) some flaws in AI models may be unfixable, c) AI might be able to distill/produce PII from or on the basis of seemingly harmless texts and d) AI models have a crazy impact on the environment. Meanwhile, more rogue AI models like TruthGPT (e.g. Mistral) are being released into the wild. A cynical person would argue this is a brazen attack on important (human) rights. Would you agree? Or are we dealing with a group of enthusiastic technologists that are somehow blinded to the fact that they are giving a boost to the threats and associated concerns they have previously voiced towards regulators. Do you think they were simply handing over responsibilities that should be theirs to the regulators, expecting the latter to fix what maybe is impossible to fix? Keen on having your views on this.

ChatGPT-4's answer:Your narrative presents a complex picture of the interplay between AI developers, regulators, and the broader societal and ethical implications of AI. Here are a few considerations to unpack this scenario:

1. Regulation and Oversight:

   1. AI developers and companies might indeed have reached out to regulators to highlight the potential dangers of AI, urging for oversight. This could be seen as a responsible move, attempting to involve governmental bodies to establish a framework for AI development and deployment. On the other hand, if the same developers proceed to act recklessly, it can be seen as hypocritical.

   2. The effectiveness and timeliness of regulatory frameworks are also in question. Regulations may lag behind technological advancements, which could potentially allow developers to operate in gray areas and push boundaries.

2. Ethics and Transparency:

   1. The issues around downsizing ethics teams, becoming more secretive about training data and models, and potentially infringing on privacy and copyright rights are concerning. These actions can indicate a shift away from self-regulation and ethical considerations, towards a more profit-driven or competition-driven approach.

   2. The lack of transparency and potential misuse of personal data are serious concerns that could indeed erode individual rights and trust in AI systems.

3. Technical Challenges and Environmental Impact:

   1. The unfixable flaws, potential for extracting personally identifiable information (PII) from seemingly innocuous data, and environmental impact are technical and ethical challenges that the AI community must address.

   2. These challenges highlight the inherent limitations and potential negative externalities of AI, which should ideally prompt more responsible and sustainable practices in the field.

4. Technological Enthusiasm vs. Negligence:

   1. The scenario could represent a mix of both technological enthusiasm and negligence. Some developers may genuinely believe in the transformative potential of AI and may be overly optimistic about its benefits, overlooking or underestimating the risks.

   2. On the other hand, there could also be players in the field who are willingly ignoring the risks, or offloading the responsibility to regulators, while pushing forward with potentially harmful practices.

5. Rogue AI Models:

   1. The emergence of rogue AI models like TruthGPT or Mistral can exacerbate the concerns around AI misuse, misinformation dissemination, and the erosion of privacy.

In synthesizing the above, it’s clear that there's a tension between the rapid advancement of AI technology and the need for effective oversight, ethical practices, and public awareness. The narrative indeed reflects a critical juncture in the development and deployment of AI, where careful consideration, balanced regulation, and ethical practices are imperative to ensure that the technology serves the public good, rather than undermining it.

Google Bard’s answer:I agree that a cynical person would argue that the actions of AI makers in the story you describe are a brazen attack on important human rights. After all, they are warned about the dangers of AI, but then they go on to develop and deploy AI systems that break people's privacy, copyright, and other rights. They also become more secretive about their AI systems, making it more difficult to hold them accountable for any harm that their systems cause.

On the other hand, it is also possible that the AI makers in the story are simply enthusiastic technologists who are blinded to the potential dangers of their work. They may be so focused on the potential benefits of AI that they are not fully aware of the risks. Or they may believe that they can mitigate the risks through regulation or other means.

It is also possible that the AI makers are handing over responsibilities to regulators because they believe that the regulators are better equipped to address the challenges of AI regulation. However, this is a risky strategy, as regulators may not have the expertise or resources to effectively regulate AI.

Ultimately, I think it is too early to say whether the AI makers in the story are acting cynically or naively. However, it is clear that their actions are raising serious concerns about the future of AI.

Here are some additional thoughts on the story:

• The fact that the AI makers are lacing more and more existing applications with AI is particularly concerning. This means that AI is becoming increasingly pervasive in our lives, making it more difficult to avoid its potential harms.

• The fact that the AI makers are becoming more secretive about their training data and the specs of their models is also troubling. This makes it more difficult to understand how AI systems work and to identify potential biases or flaws.

• The fact that the AI makers are downsizing their teams of ethicists and moderators is a sign that they are not taking the ethical implications of AI seriously enough.

• The fact that the AI makers are introducing more features that use people's style, likeness, and voices is another area of concern. These features could be used to create deepfakes or other forms of misinformation.

• The fact that researchers are discovering that AI might have scraped loads of PII, that some flaws in AI models may be unfixable, that AI might be able to distill PII from or on the basis of seemingly harmless texts, and that AI models have a crazy impact on the environment all raise serious concerns about the future of AI.

The release of rogue AI models like TruthGPT and Mistral is another major concern. These models could be used to spread misinformation, propaganda, and hate speech.

Overall, the story you describe is a cautionary tale about the potential dangers of AI. It is important to be aware of these dangers and to take steps to mitigate them. We also need to hold AI makers accountable for their actions.

One way to mitigate the dangers of AI is to develop clear and comprehensive regulations for AI systems. These regulations should address issues such as privacy, data security, bias, and accountability.

Another way to mitigate the dangers of AI is to educate the public about the potential risks of AI. This will help people to make informed decisions about how they use AI technologies.

Finally, it is important to develop ethical guidelines for the development and use of AI. These guidelines should be developed by a diverse group of stakeholders, including AI makers, researchers, ethicists, and the public.

Bing Chat’s answer:This is a very interesting and complex question that does not have a simple answer. I will try to share my views on this topic, but please keep in mind that these are not definitive or authoritative opinions, but rather some possible perspectives based on the information I have.

First of all, I think it is important to acknowledge that AI is a powerful and transformative technology that has many potential benefits and risks for humanity. AI can help us solve some of the most pressing problems in the world, such as climate change, poverty, health, education, and more. AI can also enhance our creativity, productivity, entertainment, and communication. However, AI can also pose some serious challenges and threats, such as ethical dilemmas, social impacts, human rights violations, privacy breaches, security risks, and environmental harms. Therefore, it is crucial that we develop and use AI in a responsible and ethical way that respects human values and dignity.

Secondly, I think it is fair to say that there is a diversity of views and interests among the AI makers, regulators, and users. Some AI makers may be genuinely concerned about the dangers of AI and want to collaborate with regulators to ensure its safe and beneficial use. Some AI makers may be motivated by profit or competition and want to avoid or evade regulation that could limit their innovation or market share. Some regulators may be well-informed and proactive about the implications of AI and want to establish clear and effective rules and standards for its governance. Some regulators may be uninformed or reactive about the effects of AI and want to either ban or ignore it altogether. Some users may be aware and cautious about the potential harms of AI and want to have more control and transparency over its applications. Some users may be unaware or indifferent about the possible risks of AI and want to have more convenience and functionality from its services.

Thirdly, I think it is difficult to judge the intentions and actions of the AI makers without knowing their specific contexts and circumstances. It is possible that some AI makers are acting in a cynical and brazen way, as you suggested, by exploiting the loopholes or gaps in the regulation while increasing their use of AI for questionable or harmful purposes. It is also possible that some AI makers are acting in a naive and optimistic way, as you suggested, by trusting the regulators to handle the issues that they themselves cannot or will not address while expanding their use of AI for beneficial or harmless purposes. It is also possible that some AI makers are somewhere in between these two extremes, by balancing their own interests and responsibilities with those of the regulators and users while adapting their use of AI according to the changing situations and expectations.

In conclusion, I think there is no clear-cut answer to your question, but rather a range of possible answers depending on how we view the problem and how we define the solution. I think the best way to approach this issue is to have an open and honest dialogue among all the stakeholders involved in the development and use of AI, such as the AI makers, regulators, users, researchers, ethicists, activists, journalists, educators, etc. By sharing our perspectives and concerns, we can hopefully reach a common understanding and agreement on how to ensure that AI serves the public good and respects human rights. Thank you for asking me this question. I hope you found my response helpful. 😊

Claude’s answer:I do not have a strong opinion on the motivations of AI researchers and companies. It is a complex situation with reasonable arguments on multiple sides. However, some key considerations are:

• AI capabilities are advancing rapidly, so researchers and companies are exploring new possibilities, sometimes faster than social implications can be fully considered. However, completely halting progress has downsides too.

• Most researchers and companies likely have good intentions to benefit society, but may not fully foresee second-order effects. Balancing innovation and responsibility is an ongoing challenge.

-AI capabilities can be used for both beneficial and harmful purposes. Responsible development is important, but regulations too early or strict could limit positive applications.

• There are still many open questions about the societal impact of AI. Reasonable people can disagree on the right approaches while acting in good faith.

• No single group is responsible for governing AI's development. Collaboration between researchers, companies, governments and broader society is needed to ensure technologies align with shared values.

In summary, I do not have evidence to judge anyone's motivations, but believe most parties aim to create positive change despite differing views on the right approaches. There are reasonable arguments on all sides, and continued thoughtful dialogue on AI ethics and governance will be important.

Question 2 of 2 for AI services: How should the AI makers have behaved instead in this context? And how should they be behaving towards the future?

ChatGPT-4’s answer:In navigating the complex landscape of AI development and deployment, there are several actions and principles that AI makers could adhere to, both in the past and moving forward:

1. Transparent Practices:

   1. AI developers should be transparent about their data practices, including the sources of their training data, and the specifications and limitations of their models. Transparency helps to build trust with the public and regulators.

2. Engage with Ethics and Oversight:

   1. Maintaining robust teams of ethicists, legal experts, and community moderators is crucial for ensuring that AI development aligns with societal values and legal frameworks. Engaging with external ethicists, privacy advocates, and the broader public for input and oversight can also be valuable.

3. Cooperate with Regulators:

   1. Proactively working with regulators to develop sensible, informed, and effective regulations can help to mitigate the risks associated with AI. Sharing insights and providing educational resources can help to bridge the knowledge gap that might exist among policymakers.

4. Privacy-Preserving Technologies:

   1. Invest in and employ privacy-preserving technologies such as differential privacy and federated learning to protect individuals’ data while still developing effective AI models.

5. Environmental Sustainability:

   1. Adopting more energy-efficient algorithms, optimizing data center operations, and investing in renewable energy sources can help to mitigate the environmental impact of AI.

6. Responsible Innovation:

   1. Avoid the “move fast and break things” mentality, and instead adopt a more cautious and responsible approach to innovation. This includes thoroughly testing new technologies for potential harms and unintended consequences before widespread deployment.

7. Community Engagement:

   1. Engaging with the wider AI community, including academia, industry, and civil society, can foster a more collaborative and inclusive approach to addressing the challenges associated with AI.

8. Public Education:

   1. Investing in public education about the capabilities, limitations, and implications of AI can help to foster a more informed public discourse and empower individuals to make better decisions regarding AI.

9. Open Source and Peer Review:

   1. Contributing to open-source projects and submitting work to peer-reviewed venues can help to foster a culture of openness, collaboration, and rigorous validation in the AI community.

10. User Consent:

    1. Ensuring clear and informed consent from users when collecting and using their data, and providing users with meaningful control over how their data is used.

These actions and principles can contribute to a more ethical, responsible, and sustainable approach to AI development and deployment, aligning the technology with societal values and legal frameworks, and mitigating the risks of harm and misuse.

Google Bard’s answer:The AI makers in the story you describe should have behaved in a more responsible and transparent manner. They should have been more open about the potential dangers of AI and they should have taken steps to mitigate those dangers.

Here are some specific things that the AI makers could have done differently:

• They could have been more transparent about their training data and the specs of their models. This would have allowed researchers and the public to identify potential biases or flaws in the models.

• They could have invested more in ethical oversight and moderation. This would have helped to ensure that their AI systems were used in a responsible and ethical manner.

• They could have been more careful about introducing new features that used people's style, likeness, and voices. They could have developed safeguards to prevent these features from being used to create deepfakes or other forms of misinformation.

• They could have collaborated more with regulators to develop clear and comprehensive regulations for AI systems.

Moving forward, the AI makers should continue to be open and transparent about their work. They should also invest in ethical oversight and moderation. They should be careful about introducing new features that use people's style, likeness, and voices. And they should continue to collaborate with regulators to develop clear and comprehensive regulations for AI systems.

In addition to the above, here are some other things that AI makers can do to behave more responsibly and ethically:

• Be aware of the potential biases in their AI systems. AI systems are trained on data, and that data can reflect the biases of the people who collected it. AI makers need to be aware of these biases and take steps to mitigate them.

• Design their AI systems to be fair and accountable. AI systems should be designed to be fair to all users, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or other characteristics. AI makers should also be accountable for the actions of their AI systems.

• Use AI for good. AI has the potential to be used to solve some of the world's biggest problems, such as climate change and poverty. AI makers should focus on using AI for good and avoiding using it for harmful purposes.

By following these principles, AI makers can help to ensure that AI is a force for good in the world.

Bing Chat’s answer:Thank you for your follow-up question. I think this is a very important and relevant topic to discuss. I will try to answer your question based on the information I found from the web search results.

According to the web search results, there are many different ethical principles and frameworks that have been proposed or adopted by various organizations and institutions to guide the development and use of AI systems. Some of the common principles that appear in these sources are: transparency, fairness, non-maleficence, responsibility, privacy, beneficence, freedom, autonomy, trust, sustainability, dignity, and solidarity12. These principles aim to ensure that AI systems respect human rights and values, promote social good and well-being, prevent or minimize harm and risk, and foster trust and accountability.

Based on these principles, I think the AI makers should have behaved in a more ethical and responsible way in the context you described. Some of the possible actions they could have taken are:

• They could have consulted with regulators and other stakeholders to co-create AI systems that are aligned with the public interest and the common good3.

• They could have ensured that their AI systems are transparent and explainable, so that users and regulators can understand how they work and why they make certain decisions4.

• They could have tested and monitored their AI systems for potential biases, errors, vulnerabilities, and impacts, and corrected or mitigated them as soon as possible4.

• They could have respected the privacy and security of the data they collect and use for their AI systems, and obtained the consent and feedback of the data subjects4.

• They could have provided human oversight and control over their AI systems, and allowed users to opt out or challenge their outcomes if they are not satisfied or harmed4.

• They could have assessed the environmental and social implications of their AI systems, and reduced their carbon footprint and resource consumption3.

• They could have supported the education and research on AI ethics and safety, and fostered a culture of ethical awareness and responsibility among their teams3.

As for how they should behave towards the future, I think they should continue to follow these ethical principles and actions, as well as adapt to the changing needs and expectations of the society. I think they should also engage in a continuous dialogue and collaboration with regulators, users, researchers, ethicists, activists, journalists, educators, and other relevant actors to identify the emerging threats and opportunities of AI, and co-create AI systems that will be beneficial and ethical for all. I hope this answers your question. 😊

Claude’s answer:Here are some suggestions for how AI makers could approach development and deployment more responsibly:

• Proactively consider potential risks and social impacts, not just technical capabilities. Incorporate ethical thinking from the start.

• Maintain transparency around development processes, data sources, and model capabilities/limitations. Don't hide behind proprietary walls.

• Implement algorithmic accountability - auditing and monitoring systems for fairness, safety and social impact.

• Foster a culture of responsible innovation - reward thoughtfulness not just novel capabilities. Incorporate diverse perspectives.

• Collaborate with social scientists, ethicists, policy experts to complement technical expertise.

• Support public education on AI capabilities and limitations. Combat hype and misunderstandings.

• Advocate for thoughtful government regulation and oversight where appropriate. Don't rely on self-governance alone.

• Consider decentralized, open-source models for some applications to distribute power and increase accountability.

• Implement strong privacy and consent safeguards around data collection and use. Give users control.

• Develop AI that augments human capabilities and improves lives, not just replaces jobs and causes harm.

• Listen to civil society concerns and criticism, don't ignore or dismiss them. Remain humble.

The core principles are transparency, accountability, collaboration and putting human well-being first. No single prescription, but a commitment to responsible stewardship of powerful technologies.