Elizabeth A. Seger

Researcher at GovAI running projects on Democratising AI and Epistemic Security.

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

C https://t.co/e2mlptA4RJ ca bb l m z ca

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

Proud to be co-chairing #IASEAI25 ahead of the #AIActionSummit.
Join us to bring together AI safety and ethics to build a future for AI that is beneficial to humans.
Apply to attend by *Dec 4*. https://t.co/VDqWdHoBA0

[International Association for Safe & Ethical AI @IASEAIorg]

Join experts on AI Safety & Ethics - including keynote speakers @Yoshua_Bengio, @katecrawford, & @JosephEStiglitz - in Paris at #IASEAI25, official side event to the #AIActionSummit!

Application deadline extended to *Dec 4* Submit here: https://t.co/T2PT44iBbx

[Demos @Demos]

Fascinating new research from @turinginst, who rightly flag the threat posed by generative AI to our election.

We recently issued an Open Letter to political leaders, calling on them to sign a cross-party agreement on responsible AI use.

Find out more: https://t.co/CqipMNrVK9

[Demos @Demos]

How can electoral integrity stand up to the threats of AI-generated deepfakes?

@ea_seger explores with @TimesRadio the urgent need to protect our democracy during this election campaign.

📻Listen to the full interview from 50:39 👉https://t.co/oObvpjXKqZ

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

(🧵2/3)
The four commitments
1⃣Not using gen-AI to produce misleading content
2⃣Ensuring that where they do use this technology that it is clearly labelled
3⃣Not amplifying misleading content like deepfakes
4⃣Ensuring their campaigns staff and supporters have guidelines to follow

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

(🧵1/2) So great to see @turinginst calling for cross-party agreement to responsible use of Gen AI during the elections. @Demos and @FullFact have called for the same in our open letter. https://t.co/OjUCQ3mZCV
The open letter calls for political parties to commit to four steps:

[The Alan Turing Institute @turinginst]

📒 CETaS' (Centre for Emerging Technology & Security) new report explores AI-enabled election security threats:
✳️Types of threat
✳️Timeline of when threats could occur
✳️Mitigating risks
📖 With the UK general election coming up, find out more:
https://t.co/SOYPIIYO1k

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

@sriramk the claim at the end of point 1 that we have "resolved the black box issue" feels like a stretch. Can you clarify what is meant? Thanks!

[Haydn Belfield @HaydnBelfield]

Really helpful thread

[Kevin Bankston @KevinBankston]

Excited to be a part of next week's kick-off event for @NTIAgov's public consultation on risks & benefits of foundation models w/open weights. NTIA's Kevin Li moderates panel w/me @pcihon @sayashk @ea_seger + remarks from @DavidsonNTIA @AlexReeveGivens https://t.co/xoltQtmREH

[Future Intelligence @LeverhulmeCFI]

Congratulations to all of the Brilliant Women in AI Ethics, wonderful to see many of our staff, associates, students, alumni and friends on the 2023 top 100 list!! @ea_seger @FranBaker1 Beba Cibralic and @MarkeliusAlva https://t.co/iJJ7DH8OCw

[Risto Uuk @RistoUuk]

The EU AI Act hasn’t ever existed, it doesn’t exist right now and it won’t exist for a while, so surely whatever the issues in the EU AI innovation area it isn’t due to the AI Act? The Act actually aims to support companies, especially EU SMEs. Its proposed tiered approach for general-purpose AI intends to minimize the burden on SMEs by seeking to facilitate information sharing and safety guarantees from larger entities. It tries to come up with various thresholds to explicitly exclude smaller players from most obligations. This overall approach seems highly innovation-friendly, tailored to aid smaller players. Why are some explicitly opposed to it? Do they not want to support SMEs and increase AI uptake through ensuring a higher level of quality and trust?

In addition, look at Article 55 in the Act aiming to provide support for SMEs and startups. Specific measures include granting priority access for SMEs and EU-based startups to regulatory sandboxes if eligibility criteria are met. Additionally, tailored awareness raising and digital skills development activities will be organised to address the needs of smaller organisations. Moreover, dedicated communication channels will be set up to offer guidance and respond to queries from SMEs and startups. Participation of SMEs and other stakeholders in the standards development process will also be encouraged. To reduce the financial burden of compliance, conformity assessment fees will be lowered for SMEs and startups based on factors like development stage, size, and market demand. The Commission will regularly review certification and compliance costs for SMEs/startups (with input from transparent consultations) and work with Member States to reduce these costs where possible.

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

(10/10) Also, if model access is restricted because of significant risks of open model release, the model can later be opened if and when defensive capabilities catch up to adequately address those risks. Decisions to open-source are, however, irreversible.

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

(1/10) Last week I was on #YourUndividedAttention with @tristanharris, @aza, and @JeffLadish speaking about
"The Promise and Peril of Open Source AI"
https://t.co/2QSCSTYI2M

See thread 🧵 for some key takeaways:

[Elizabeth A. Seger @ea_seger]

(9/10)
❌Always open v. Always closed

Models for which access is initially restricted can be opened up later date. This gives time for studying model impacts (e.g. in a staged released process).