Skip to main content

Don't Look To Sunak To Effectively Regulate AI

 


Sunak, as reported in the Guardian, was speaking on the plane to Japan for the G7 summit, where AI will be discussed, Sunak said a global approach to regulation was needed. “We have taken a deliberately iterative approach because the technology is evolving quickly and we want to make sure that our regulation can evolve as it does as well,” he said. “Now that is going to involve coordination with our allies … you would expect it to form some of the conversations as well at the G7.

“I think that the UK has a track record of being in a leadership position and bringing people together, particularly in regard to technological regulation in the online safety bill … And again, the companies themselves, in that instance as well, have worked with us and looked to us to provide those guard rails as they will do and have done on AI.”

The white paper on AI regulation the government introduced in March directly contradicts Sunak's statements as I've written about before. It's all about enabling AI companies, largely ignoring regulation. As far as 'bringing people together' in regard the 'online safety bill', the real result was bringing together criticisms the government refused to address in amendments. A good example is from Article 19 who point out the human rights concerns. The Bill ignores the platforms' business model that amplifies harmful content and gives them too much power over users' speech. It also relies on algorithmic moderation that often removes legal content and harms freedom of expression. 

As Paul Bernal pointed out in his blog: 'As it is, the Online Safety Bill looks likely to attack the symptoms rather than the causes of online harms. Unless it finds a way to address the underlying problems – and to confront the massive blind spot it has for the role of politicians and journalists – it will be just yet another massive game of Whac-A-Mole, doomed to failure and disappointment.'

One only has to look at the recent track record of this and recent administrations to realise that no effective AI regulation will emanate from the UK before it's too late.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Whispers in the Machine: Why Prompt Injection Remains a Persistent Threat to LLMs

 Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly transforming how we interact with technology, offering incredible potential for tasks ranging from content creation to complex analysis. However, as these powerful tools become more integrated into our lives, so too do the novel security challenges they present. Among these, prompt injection attacks stand out as a particularly persistent and evolving threat. These attacks, as one recent paper (Safety at Scale: A Comprehensive Survey of Large Model Safety https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.05206) highlights, involve subtly manipulating LLMs to deviate from their intended purpose, and the methods are becoming increasingly sophisticated. At its core, a prompt injection attack involves embedding a malicious instruction within an otherwise normal request, tricking the LLM into producing unintended – and potentially harmful – outputs. Think of it as slipping a secret, contradictory instruction into a seemingly harmless conversation. What makes prompt inj...
Post a Comment
Read more

Can We Build a Safe Superintelligence? Safe Superintelligence Inc. Raises Intriguing Questions

  Safe Superintelligence Inc . (SSI) has burst onto the scene with a bold mission: to create the world's first safe superintelligence (SSI). Their (Ilya Sutskever, Daniel Gross, Daniel Levy) ambition is undeniable, but before we all sign up to join their "cracked team," let's delve deeper into the potential issues with their approach. One of the most critical questions is defining "safe" superintelligence. What values would guide this powerful AI? How can we ensure it aligns with the complex and often contradictory desires of humanity?  After all, "safe" for one person might mean environmental protection, while another might prioritise economic growth, even if it harms the environment.  Finding universal values that a superintelligence could adhere to is a significant hurdle that SSI hasn't fully addressed. Another potential pitfall lies in SSI's desire to rapidly advance capabilities while prioritising safety.  Imagine a Formula One car wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

AI Agents and the Latest Silicon Valley Hype

In what appears to be yet another grandiose proclamation from the tech industry, Google has released a whitepaper extolling the virtues of what they're calling "Generative AI agents". (https://www.aibase.com/news/14498) Whilst the basic premise—distinguishing between AI models and agents—holds water, one must approach these sweeping claims with considerable caution. Let's begin with the fundamentals. Yes, AI models like Large Language Models do indeed process information and generate outputs. That much isn't controversial. However, the leap from these essentially sophisticated pattern-matching systems to autonomous "agents" requires rather more scrutiny than the tech evangelists would have us believe. The whitepaper's architectural approaches—with their rather grandiose names like "ReAct" and "Tree of Thought"—sound remarkably like repackaged versions of long-standing computer science concepts, dressed up in fashionable AI clot...
Post a Comment
Read more