US and UK refuse to sign AI safety declaration at summit

Comments

• tal@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  to ensure that the technology is “safe, secure and trustworthy.”

  None of the really iconic AIs are safe, secure or trustworthy.

  Image

  Image

  Image

  source

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    What’s the ball and the last one from?

    source

    • tal@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      From top-to-bottom:

      • HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey

      • 343 Guilty Spark from Halo: Combat Evolved

      • GLaDOS from Portal

      • Skynet from The Terminator

      • Joshua from Wargames

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• JustJack23@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  UK still pretending to be a global power I see.

  source

  • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Sadly it is in one respect only: financial services.

    And that’s the only reason why they’re interested; so the City (of London, not Greater London) has more freedom to invest into these AI start-ups and get their big payout when they grow large enough to move head office to the US.

    source
• Telorand@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Dunno about the UK, but the US is going guns blazing towards Robocops.

  Ironically, police probably think they’ll be in charge of the robots, rather than the robots replacing them.

  source
• ReCursing@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  All regulation of new technology is pointless because the law is written by people who don’t understand it. And by “new technology” I mean anything invented after the year 1900

  source

  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Hell, I’ve written part of one of the regs under title 26. That should give you a clue how poorly put together the whole of it is.

    source
• nullPointer@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  wouldn’t make much sense to sign an agreement you are already in violation of.

  source
• it3agle@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Starmer would be better off doing exactly the opposite of everything Trump does.

  source
• concrete_baby@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Why did the UK refuse?

  source

  • Quazatron@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Tradition. You can’t go around breaking traditions, now can you, minister?

    source
  • FarceOfWill@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    In a brief statement, the UK government said it had not been able to add its name to it because of concerns about national security and “global governance.”

    www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8edn0n58gwo

    No idea if thats a real reason or not.

    source

    • Telorand@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Sounds like “we need to have guns if they have guns.” Might be right in the short term, but at what future cost?

      source
  • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Perhaps due to the same reason UK avoided tariff threats.

    Spineless leader. UK is unfortunately a lapdog in this special relationship.

    source
• jpreston2005@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Between this and the asteroid scheduled to (maybe) hit Earth in 2032, I’m beginning to think that we’re in for a rough time.

  source
• scripthook@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Ai regulation is a joke because the tech evolves faster than legislation. Esp when you have open source LLMs out there. Not to mention Meta pirating Terrabytes of textbooks to train their models

  source