🚨BREAKING: This will be the structure of the EU AI Office. Here's what you need to know: ➡️According to the official page, from 16 June, the organizational setup of the European AI office will consist of 5 units and 2 advisors: ➵ The “Excellence in AI and Robotics” unit ➵ The “Regulation and Compliance” unit ➵ The “AI Safety” unit ➵ The “AI Innovation and Policy Coordination” unit ➵ The “AI for Societal Good” unit ➵ The Lead Scientific Advisor ➵ The Advisor for International Affairs ➡️The AI Office will employ over 140 staff, including: ➵ Technology Specialists ➵ Administrative Assistants ➵ Lawyers ➵ Policy Specialists ➵ Economists ➡️The AI Office will recruit people with a variety of backgrounds, and you can sign up to receive their updates (link below). ➡️To stay up to date with the latest developments in AI policy & regulation, subscribe to my weekly newsletter.

🚨BREAKING: Singapore releases the report "Model Al Governance Framework for Generative Al - Fostering a Trusted Ecosystem," and it's a must-read for everyone interested in AI policy & regulation. Important information: ➡️The report outlines 9 dimensions to "create a trusted environment – one that enables end-users to use Generative AI confidently and safely, while allowing space for cutting-edge innovation." These are the 9 dimensions: ➵ Accountability ➵ Data ➵ Trusted Development and Deployment ➵ Incident Reporting ➵ Testing and Assurance ➵ Security ➵ Content Provenance ➵ Safety and Alignment R&D ➵ AI for Public Good ➡️Interesting quotes: "Responsibility can be allocated based on the level of control that each stakeholder has in the generative AI development chain, so that the able party takes necessary action to protect end-users. As a reference, while there may be various stakeholders in the development chain, the cloud industry7 has built and codified comprehensive shared responsibility models over time. The objective is to ensure overall security of the cloud environment. These models allocate responsibility by explaining the controls and measures that cloud service providers (who provide the base infrastructure layer) and their customers (who host applications on the layer above)respectively undertake." (page 7) - "There is, therefore, a need to work with key parties in the content life cycle, such as working with publishers to support the embedding and display of digital watermarks and provenance details. As most digital content is consumed through social media platforms, browsers, or media outlets, publishers’ support is critical to provide end users with the ability to verify content authenticity across various channels. There is also a need to ensure proper and secure implementation to circumvent bad actors trying to exploit it in any way." (page 25) - "Industry, governments, and educational institutions can work together to redesign jobs and provide upskilling opportunities for workers. As organisations adopt enterprise generative AI solutions, they can also develop dedicated training programmes for their employees. This will enable them to navigate the transitions in their jobs and enjoy the benefits which result from job transformations" (page 30) ➡️Read the full report below. ➡️To stay up to date with the latest developments in AI policy & regulation, subscribe to my newsletter (link below).

🚨 BREAKING: The International Scientific Report on the Safety of Advanced AI - the interim report is out. Below are the highlights of the executive summary: ➵ "If properly governed, general-purpose AI can be applied to advance the public interest, potentially leading to enhanced wellbeing, more prosperity, and new scientific discoveries. However, malfunctioning or maliciously used general-purpose AI can also cause harm, for instance through biased decisions in high-stakes settings or through scams, fake media, or privacy violations. ➵ As general-purpose AI capabilities continue to advance, risks such as large-scale labour market impacts, AI-enabled hacking or biological attacks, and society losing control over general-purpose AI could emerge, although the likelihood of these scenarios is debated among researchers. Different views on these risks often stem from differing expectations about the steps society will take to limit them, the effectiveness of those steps, and how rapidly general-purpose AI capabilities will be advanced. ➵ There is considerable uncertainty about the rate of future progress in general-purpose AI capabilities. Some experts think a slowdown of progress is by far most likely, while other experts think that extremely rapid progress is possible or likely. ➵ There are various technical methods to assess and reduce risks from general-purpose AI that developers can employ and regulators can require, but they all have limitations. For example, current techniques for explaining why general-purpose AI models produce any given output are severely limited. ➵ The future of general-purpose AI technology is uncertain, with a wide range of trajectories appearing possible even in the near future, including both very positive and very negative outcomes. But nothing about the future of AI is inevitable. It will be the decisions of societies and governments that will determine the future of AI. This interim report aims to facilitate constructive discussion about these decisions." ➡ The report contains insights from 75 AI experts, including an international Expert Advisory Panel nominated by 30 countries, the EU, and the UN. It was published to inform the discussions in the context of the AI Seoul Summit 2024. ➡ Link to read the report below. ➡ To stay up to date with the latest developments in AI policy & regulation, subscribe to my newsletter.

🚨BREAKING: Council of Europe adopts 1st international treaty on AI. Here's what you need to know: ➡️The treaty - the Council of Europe Framework Convention on artificial intelligence and human rights, democracy, and the rule of law - was adopted in Strasbourg during the annual ministerial meeting of the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers. According to the official release: "The treaty, which is also open to non-European countries, sets out a legal framework that covers the entire lifecycle of AI systems and addresses the risks they may pose, while promoting responsible innovation." - "The convention adopts a risk-based approach to the design, development, use, and decommissioning of AI systems, which requires carefully considering any potential negative consequences of using AI systems." - "The treaty covers the use of AI systems in the public sector – including companies acting on its behalf - and in the private sector. The convention offers parties two ways of complying with its principles and obligations when regulating the private sector: parties may opt to be directly obliged by the relevant convention provisions or, as an alternative, take other measures to comply with the treaty's provisions while fully respecting their international obligations regarding human rights, democracy and the rule of law. This approach is necessary because of the differences in legal systems around the world" ➡️Link to the treaty below. ➡️To stay up to date with the latest developments in AI policy & regulation, subscribe to my newsletter.

🚨Fascinating AI paper alert: "Consent and Compensation: Resolving Generative AI’s Copyright Crisis" by @FrankPasquale & @haochensun is a must-read for everyone interested in AI, copyright, and artists' rights. Quotes: "The opacity and scale of AI systems is disrupting the knowledge ecosystem by significantly eroding authors’ proprietary control of their works, well beyond extant digital practices that have already undermined many authors’ well-being. Whereas prior scraping at scale tended to be focused on the non-expressive aspects of works (such as facts), AI is focused by many prompts on their expressive dimensions. Search engines have historically provided links which lead users to works themselves. In contrast, AI tends to provide substitutes for such works, while failing to provide citations to the works in the dataset most similar to the texts, images, and videos it presents as a computed synthesis." (pages 8-9) - "Under the proposed mechanism, copyright owners can first request AI providers to take actions to effectively prevent their systems from generating outputs that appear identical or substantially similar to relevant copyrighted works. A copyright owner would be entitled to send a notice to an AI provider when he or she identifies that an output generated by the provider’s AI system contains either a verbatim or substantially similar copy of his or her work, or a derivative work. In the notice, the copyright owner would be obliged to document the unauthorized reproduction of the work and his or her copyright ownership, along with a digital copy or an online link to the work." (page 21) - "Given the complexity of the AI supply chain, particularly with respect to generative AI, it is not feasible to impose a per-device cost on AI providers. However, other triggers for payment are possible. Levies on the use of particular datasets may be imposed, or on model training, or on some aggregate number of responses provided to users, or on paid subscriptions. Alternatively, the level of the levy could be benchmarked with respect to some percentage of AI providers’ expenditures or revenues" (page 39) ➡️Link to the paper below. ➡️For the latest updates in AI policy & regulation, including excellent papers, subscribe to my newsletter.