AI firms mustn’t govern themselves, say ex-members of OpenAI’s board
For humanity’s sake, regulation is needed to tame market forces, argue Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley
CAN PRIVATE companies pushing forward the frontier of a revolutionary new technology be expected to operate in the interests of both their shareholders and the wider world? When we were recruited to the board of OpenAI—Tasha in 2018 and Helen in 2021—we were cautiously optimistic that the company’s innovative approach to self-governance could offer a blueprint for responsible AI development. But based on our experience, we believe that self-governance cannot reliably withstand the pressure of profit incentives. With AI’s enormous potential for both positive and negative impact, it’s not sufficient to assume that such incentives will always be aligned with the public good. For the rise of AI to benefit everyone, governments must begin building effective regulatory frameworks now.
Explore more
Discover more
Three presidents on the partnerships that can at last transform Africa
Success teeters on bold, stable funding, say Julius Maada Bio, Lazarus Chakwera and Andry Rajoelina
Assisted-dying advocates’ claims of freedom have it backward, says Danny Kruger
One of a pair of essays in which members of Parliament argue their cases
My assisted-dying bill safely solves a grave injustice, says Kim Leadbeater
One of a pair of essays in which members of Parliament argue their cases
“Middle powers” can thrive in the age of AI, says Eric Schmidt
Google’s former chief executive has a playbook for riding out the revolution
Polls get elections wrong. So use Google, says Seth Stephens-Davidowitz
The data scientist argues that stronger predictions lie in what people search for
War in Ukraine may only intensify under Trump, says Dmytro Kuleba
The country’s former foreign minister explains the powderkeg that is three leaders in a cannot-lose standoff