The AI control gap: Who gets to say ‘It’s safe’?

We see a control gap between what artificial intelligence can do and what the evidence supports trusting it to do. A great demo doesn’t prove that a system will stay within the limits of an intended deployment’s goals. The question is: Who gets to decide when the evidence is sufficient to declare AI is safe? We believe that decision needs independent oversight and enforceable authority. Today, we draw on extensive conversations with Appian Corp. Chief Executive Matt Calkins, who helps us connect public policy to the agents acting inside a business, and the opportunity to make those systems dependable enough to receive more trusted authority. In this week’s episode, we explore the AI control gap and the starting point for addressing AI safety, namely alignment. We question prevailing narratives around China and propose a public policy regime that has more teeth than what has been put forth thus far. And we bring in customer data from our partner Qualitate to capture the buyer sentiment on these issues. Let’s start with: Who can actually say no? This tongue-in-cheek illustration below comes from Amit Govrin. He wrote a post last week called “Grading Other’s Homework.” Amit conceived a gathering at the White…