This piece argues for an AI Social Contract as a safeguard, with staged licensing and human oversight in “gray zones.”
It suggests that imperfection itself should be a design principle.
Do we need governance frameworks like this — or is existing liability law enough?
No. This post has jumped quite a few lines that aren't settled yet, and that line there is the biggest assumption. No, AI is not to "live among us". It is a tool. Nothing more. We need to stop anthropomorphizing these tools.
Nevertheless, I can acknowledge the need for governance with AI. I was thinking that policy around it can be summarized with the acronym "AAA", representing the 3 things AI cannot be granted: Autonomy, Ambition, and Access. Stay away from giving it those things and it remains a safe tool.
2 comments
[ 5.5 ms ] story [ 18.6 ms ] threadNo. This post has jumped quite a few lines that aren't settled yet, and that line there is the biggest assumption. No, AI is not to "live among us". It is a tool. Nothing more. We need to stop anthropomorphizing these tools.
Nevertheless, I can acknowledge the need for governance with AI. I was thinking that policy around it can be summarized with the acronym "AAA", representing the 3 things AI cannot be granted: Autonomy, Ambition, and Access. Stay away from giving it those things and it remains a safe tool.