We have to manage the AI revolution - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
专栏 人工智能

We have to manage the AI revolution

There must be a global agreement on how the technology is controlled
00:00

{"text":[[{"start":5.6,"text":"In my last two columns, I argued that AI brings both opportunities and great dangers, some even existential. This transformative technology also threatens fundamental values, including personal and institutional accountability, the rule of law, democracy and even what it means to be human. Moreover, AI will be hard to regulate successfully, not only because its impact will be pervasive, but because progress is being driven by fierce competition among businesses and between the US and China."}],[{"start":null,"text":"

"}],[{"start":36.3,"text":"Remarkably, a recent post from Anthropic states that “we are delegating a growing share of AI development to AI systems themselves . . . Taken far enough, and given enough compute, that trend points to an AI system capable of . . . autonomously designing and developing its own successor.” The post then states that “if it were possible to . . . slow the development of this technology, to give ourselves more time to deal with its immense implications, we think that would likely be a good thing”. If even Anthropic, a leader in AI, is fearful of what lurks ahead, the fears of the rest of us, especially the young, can only be reinforced."}],[{"start":74.55,"text":"A big part of this politically salient concern is over the unemployment downside of the assumed productivity upside. But the speed and scale of the transformation AI will produce is unknown. My colleague John Burn-Murdoch noted recently, for example, that the increase in the supply of apps generated by AI has not led to a corresponding rise in their use. It has also generated a bigger jump in output in the early stages of software development than in final products. (See charts.)"}],[{"start":null,"text":"
"}],[{"start":103.9,"text":"Again, an overview of the employment impact of AI issued by the International Labour Organization last year concluded that, globally, one in four workers is in an occupation with some exposure to generative AI. But, it also adds, just “3.3 per cent of global employment falls into the highest exposure category”. This does not seem a huge disruption. Moreover, in the past long lags have occurred between big innovations (electricity, for example) and higher productivity. As Paul Krugman writes, productivity growth has been lower during the digital era than it was after the second world war, a period without such breakthroughs."}],[{"start":null,"text":"
"}],[{"start":139.65,"text":"At the opposite end of the debate, Vinod Khosla, an experienced technology investor, states in the FT that “I’m certain AI will do 80 per cent of the economically valuable work humans do today, for 80 per cent of all jobs, faster than most believe. The question isn’t whether mass underemployment arrives by the next decade, but whether we have a coherent policy framework ready when it does.”"}],[{"start":164.6,"text":"Scepticism about the speed and scale of AI’s impact is justified. But Khosla is right: we need to prepare. Civilisation might not survive the existential shocks and economic disruptions that AI threatens. Uncertainty justifies readiness, not complacency."}],[{"start":181.79999999999998,"text":"So, what must readiness mean?"}],[{"start":184.24999999999997,"text":"First, we need to be prepared for a world in which machines will be taking big and in some cases — notably those of war and biological research — hugely consequential decisions. Ultimately, humans have to be accountable for those decisions, as programmers of AI, managers of the companies that sell it and decision makers in institutions that use it. Contrary to Argentine President Javier Milei’s view, AI must not run institutions without accountability of people. Owners, managers and officials should be liable to criminal and civil penalties for damage caused by AI."}],[{"start":null,"text":"
"}],[{"start":219.14999999999998,"text":"Second, we cannot rely on the moral sense and self-restraint of AI creators. We have already had terrible experience with social media. As I have noted: “Disseminating lies and frauds can be good business. Worse, disseminating posts that make people’s lives unbearable can be a good business . . . Artificial intelligence seems likely to worsen our collective plight by creating ‘perfect’ frauds of all kinds.” Anthropic may want to slow the pace. But it is in a race: it cannot control what its competitors do. We do not allow drugs companies to release medicines that have not gone through a suitable testing regime, for very good reason. Something similar should apply to new AI software. Moreover, in a competitive business, such regimes also have to apply globally."}],[{"start":null,"text":"
"}],[{"start":264.09999999999997,"text":"Third, this is why regimes cannot just be national. There must be a global agreement on how AI is to be tested and controlled and how liability for damage is to be imposed. The EU, it appears, is once again playing the role of regulator of first (or last) resort. This may not be such a bad thing. People around the world even trust the EU to be a better regulator than the US or China, probably because they believe it will be less captured by business interests or the desire to use AI as a weapon. But ideally, China and the US should be the keystones of any agreement. AI is too risky for everybody to develop unchecked."}],[{"start":null,"text":"
"}],[{"start":301.54999999999995,"text":"Last and particularly important, there is a good chance that AI will in time devastate the labour market, increase inequality and create an extraordinary concentration of economic — and so political — power in the hands of a tiny number of businesses and people. If we add this to the many other threats the technology poses, we confront an enormous risk of an autocratic overthrow of democracy. Indeed, it is already happening. Those who wish to see the survival of government of the people, for the people, by the people must try to stop this. The most obvious implication is that a good part of the increased income and wealth must be shared. The time to prepare for this is now. If we do not act, it will be far too late."}],[{"start":348.29999999999995,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftcn.net.cn/album/a_1781738997_6825.mp3"}

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

伊朗科学家卡韦•马达尼:人们不会为一滴水而开战

这位流亡的前政府官员讲述物资短缺如何推升冲突,以及为何围绕他的阴谋论“已经不好笑了”。

如果SpaceX估值失准,不要怪罪被动型投资者

资本不会被指数基金错配——真正造成错配的是选股者。

伊朗拟对通过霍尔木兹海峡的船只收取“保险费”

政府机构表示,船只必须持有德黑兰批准的保险单,方可通行这一关键水道。

外交官:以色列袭击黎巴嫩后,伊朗推迟与美国的会谈

德黑兰在遭遇袭击后,推迟原定在瑞士举行的核谈判。

特朗普让伊朗股市“再次伟大”

这里说的“库存”可不是浓缩铀那种。

俄罗斯央行行长缺席引发继任猜测

近期多场高规格活动上都未见俄罗斯央行行长埃尔薇拉•纳比乌琳娜露面,引发外界对高层改组的猜测。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×