What Yoshua Bengio thinks about AI alignment
Everything they publish, on ppll ↗
Yoshua Bengio did not write this page.
We collected these quotes from things they published elsewhere, and every quote links to where it was said. They have no account here and have not endorsed this site. Quotes are word for word; the short line under each one is our own restatement, not their wording. Their own site. Is this you? Claim it or ask us to remove it. Or tell us what is wrong here.
5 dated positions, 2023, in their own words. Our reading of what Yoshua Bengio has said — not written or endorsed by them.
-
Their wordsSociety's response, despite promising first steps, is incommensurate with the possibility of rapid, transformative progress that is expected by many experts. AI safety research is lagging. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
↗Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress (with 24 co-authors)arxiv.org 1st of 4 in this piece
-
Their wordsWithout sufficient caution, we may irreversibly lose control of autonomous AI systems, rendering human intervention ineffective. Large-scale cybercrime, social manipulation, and other harms could escalate rapidly. This unchecked AI advancement could culminate in a large-scale loss of life and the biosphere, and the marginalization or extinction of humanity.
↗Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress (with 24 co-authors)arxiv.org 3rd of 4 in this piece
- 2 months earlier
-
Their wordsReading the book had not changed my fundamental belief that, in balance, we were on a good trajectory with AI research: good for science and good for society with expected positive impacts in many domains.
-
Our reading · no longer heldAI research is on a good trajectory overall — good for science and good for society — and existential concerns will only become relevant in the distant future.
No longer holdsI now believe that I was wrong and short-sighted to ignore that dual-use nature. I also think I was not paying enough attention to the possibility of losing control to superhuman AIs.
SaidI now believe that I was wrong and short-sighted to ignore that dual-use nature. I also think I was not paying enough attention to the possibility of losing control to superhuman AIs.
- 7 weeks earlier
-
Their wordsAt the same time, in order to reduce the probability of someone intentionally or unintentionally bringing about a rogue AI, we need to increase governance and we should consider limiting access to the large-scale generalist AI systems that could be weaponized, which would mean that the code and neural net parameters would not be shared in open-source and some of the important engineering tricks to make them work would not be shared either.