1
00:00:01,880 --> 00:00:05,317
There are many things that AI
cannot and should not automate.

2
00:00:05,400 --> 00:00:08,797
AI should be built for people,
not simply to turn the crank crank of the

3
00:00:08,880 --> 00:00:12,117
machines faster for their own sake.

4
00:00:12,200 --> 00:00:15,197
Some of the things people working to build
AI have said are so dystopian that

5
00:00:15,280 --> 00:00:18,597
they sound like the plot
of bad science fiction movies.

6
00:00:18,680 --> 00:00:22,517
Anything this power is also
powerful is also intimidating.

7
00:00:22,600 --> 00:00:24,117
This moment is complicated as we feel

8
00:00:24,200 --> 00:00:26,197
both tremendous potential and very

9
00:00:26,280 --> 00:00:29,917
understandable anxiety at the same time.

10
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:32,917
These models can help people discover
new knowledge, new medicines, better

11
00:00:33,000 --> 00:00:36,277
health care, stronger education,
and build more productive economies. They

12
00:00:36,360 --> 00:00:40,277
can be new tools for people to pursue
dreams and ambition that today feel out

13
00:00:40,360 --> 00:00:43,517
of reach. The complexity
of life has increased so

14
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,077
dramatically for the average person.

15
00:00:46,160 --> 00:00:49,637
AI can be a defensive tool against
this complexity as much as it can be this

16
00:00:49,720 --> 00:00:53,997
tool of unprecedented
discovery and innovation.

17
00:00:54,080 --> 00:00:56,397
On the other hand, as AI systems become

18
00:00:56,480 --> 00:00:59,037
more capable and more autonomous, they

19
00:00:59,120 --> 00:01:01,157
could move faster than our institutions,

20
00:01:01,240 --> 00:01:03,997
concentrate power in two two few hands,

21
00:01:04,080 --> 00:01:09,077
or make decisions that people
no longer understand or control.

22
00:01:09,160 --> 00:01:12,437
That concern becomes especially
important as we approach systems that

23
00:01:12,520 --> 00:01:16,357
can improve themselves and future
versions of themselves, often called

24
00:01:16,440 --> 00:01:20,477
recursive self-improvement.
As the process of building AI becomes

25
00:01:20,560 --> 00:01:22,997
more automated, the pace of AI progress

26
00:01:23,080 --> 00:01:24,797
could accelerate rapidly.

27
00:01:24,880 --> 00:01:28,037
This moment calls for extreme care.

28
00:01:28,120 --> 00:01:30,597
I largely agree with Professor Bengio.

29
00:01:30,680 --> 00:01:33,677
Uh although I'll say two instead of three.
I believe there are two ways that

30
00:01:33,760 --> 00:01:37,397
AI progress could go very
badly that we have to avoid.

31
00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:41,997
First, we could lose
control of the future to AI.

32
00:01:42,080 --> 00:01:44,877
The risk is that it moves so fast
that people can no longer follow what's

33
00:01:44,960 --> 00:01:49,397
happening or intervene when needed.
This would obviously be terrible.

34
00:01:49,480 --> 00:01:52,677
The industry must not accept too much
technological risk just because the

35
00:01:52,760 --> 00:01:56,237
benefits are too great and that they
feel too important to just down.

36
00:01:56,320 --> 00:02:00,317
Beating companies in a race is not
a reason to make rash decisions, nor do we

37
00:02:00,400 --> 00:02:02,917
believe we are locked in a race where
we are unable to do that. We have

38
00:02:03,000 --> 00:02:06,517
unilaterally slowed down in the past. We
will do so in the future. We do not want

39
00:02:06,600 --> 00:02:09,037
to build systems. We think it's
important that everyone avoids building

40
00:02:09,120 --> 00:02:12,797
systems where we cannot make
the alignment, monitorability, and safety

41
00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:16,237
guarantees that we must.
We need to understand what these systems

42
00:02:16,320 --> 00:02:20,077
are doing and have strong evidence that
they will do what people intend even as

43
00:02:20,160 --> 00:02:25,037
they get very, very smart. Actually,
especially as they get very, very smart.

44
00:02:25,120 --> 00:02:28,997
It doesn't matter whether people put the
risk of catastrophe at 10% or 1% or 12%

45
00:02:29,080 --> 00:02:33,237
or 0.1%. None of these levels are
remotely acceptable. And we should not

46
00:02:33,320 --> 00:02:36,557
train models that we cannot make
an extremely strong case they will be able

47
00:02:36,640 --> 00:02:41,597
to keep under human control. So,
that's one way things can go wrong.

48
00:02:41,680 --> 00:02:44,757
In the other direction, these systems
could concentrate too much power in too

49
00:02:44,840 --> 00:02:48,677
few hands. No one person
or company or country

50
00:02:48,760 --> 00:02:52,837
should be able to use the most powerful
AI models to impose their worldview on

51
00:02:52,920 --> 00:02:56,237
everyone else. A company
or country that believes only

52
00:02:56,320 --> 00:02:59,797
it can be trusted with this technology
can use that belief to justify almost

53
00:02:59,880 --> 00:03:02,917
anything else.
We have to reject that logic even when

54
00:03:03,000 --> 00:03:05,637
it's convenient for any one actor.

55
00:03:05,720 --> 00:03:09,317
I believe there is a pragmatic
path through both of these.

56
00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:12,997
At OpenAI, we approach these
questions with a clear goal.

57
00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:16,757
AI should give people more power over
their own lives, more freedom to live

58
00:03:16,840 --> 00:03:20,677
lives the way they want, more ability
to solve problems, big or small, and to

59
00:03:20,760 --> 00:03:25,117
improve their communities. We don't want
to fall into the trap of blind optimism.

60
00:03:25,200 --> 00:03:28,157
We also don't want to fall into
the trap of doomerism, either.

61
00:03:28,240 --> 00:03:31,597
Getting pulled into either extreme will
not help us successfully figure out the

62
00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:34,757
challenges in front of us,
especially at a time when the world and

63
00:03:34,840 --> 00:03:39,757
its people face such enormous challenges
that this technology can help solve.

64
00:03:39,840 --> 00:03:43,357
So, we try to walk the middle
path between these two poles.

65
00:03:43,440 --> 00:03:45,597
For us, that means three principles.

66
00:03:45,680 --> 00:03:50,677
First, as AI becomes more capable,
people must remain at the center of AI

67
00:03:50,760 --> 00:03:53,877
decision-making. Alignment
is not an abstract research

68
00:03:53,960 --> 00:03:57,797
question. It is the work of ensuring
that these systems reliably remain under

69
00:03:57,880 --> 00:04:01,197
human control, reflect
human values, and help people

70
00:04:01,280 --> 00:04:03,597
guide the next stages of development.

71
00:04:03,680 --> 00:04:08,117
We are not trying to and must not
automate human judgment or human values.

72
00:04:08,200 --> 00:04:12,317
Second, the benefits of scientific
progress and economic growth must be by

73
00:04:12,400 --> 00:04:15,117
people and for people.
AI should help researchers make

74
00:04:15,200 --> 00:04:18,557
discoveries, doctors treat patients,
teachers teach students, entrepreneurs

75
00:04:18,640 --> 00:04:21,797
start companies, communities solve
problems that felt out of reach, and

76
00:04:21,880 --> 00:04:26,877
much more. The continuous story of human
progress is not the tools replace human

77
00:04:26,960 --> 00:04:30,597
agency, it is that the right tools make
people more capable, and I believe this

78
00:04:30,680 --> 00:04:33,797
is going to go much further
than we believe possible.

79
00:04:33,880 --> 00:04:37,557
Third, this technology must
empower people individually.

80
00:04:37,640 --> 00:04:40,837
A great future will come from people
realizing their potential and building

81
00:04:40,920 --> 00:04:45,197
value for themselves, their communities,
their countries, and the broader world.

82
00:04:45,280 --> 00:04:48,237
We might be with the builders, one
of the builders of this technology, but we

83
00:04:48,320 --> 00:04:49,997
are not the heroes of this story.

84
00:04:50,080 --> 00:04:51,597
Our role is to enable people all over

85
00:04:51,680 --> 00:04:57,477
the world, and to trust in the magic
of humanity's skill and faculties.

86
00:04:57,560 --> 00:05:01,717
We now have models capable of discovering
knowledge that we have never had before.

87
00:05:01,800 --> 00:05:04,277
Consider the progress we've seen in math.

88
00:05:04,360 --> 00:05:07,957
Three summers ago, our models
were okay at grade school math.

89
00:05:08,040 --> 00:05:11,837
Two summers ago, they were pretty
good at high school math competitions.

90
00:05:11,920 --> 00:05:15,437
Last summer, we reached gold level
a gold level medal in the most prestigious

91
00:05:15,520 --> 00:05:17,597
international math competition.

92
00:05:17,680 --> 00:05:20,797
And just a few weeks ago this summer,
one of our models solved one of the

93
00:05:20,880 --> 00:05:24,477
millennium prize problems,
the Navier-Stokes equations.

94
00:05:24,560 --> 00:05:27,717
These equations are used for aircraft
design, weather forecasting, and the

95
00:05:27,800 --> 00:05:30,597
study of blood flow.
We are not solving math problems for

96
00:05:30,680 --> 00:05:34,517
their own sake, but to empower people to
discover new knowledge, and to use it to

97
00:05:34,600 --> 00:05:38,317
improve health care, raise standards
of livings st- of living, and expand

98
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:40,277
everyone's potential around the world.

99
00:05:40,360 --> 00:05:43,157
There remains so much to be discovered.

100
00:05:43,240 --> 00:05:47,357
But it's very important that companies
not substitute for the democratic process.

101
00:05:47,440 --> 00:05:50,997
If AI is to be democratic, the most
important decisions cannot be made by

102
00:05:51,080 --> 00:05:55,757
labs in San Francisco alone. They must
be shaped through democratic processes

103
00:05:55,840 --> 00:05:59,237
and by governments accountable
to the people that they serve.

104
00:05:59,320 --> 00:06:03,157
At the international level,
this will require cooperation.

105
00:06:03,240 --> 00:06:06,277
In our history, there have been times
where countries who compete and don't

106
00:06:06,360 --> 00:06:09,917
always like each other very much still
come together for shared interests and

107
00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:13,357
the collective good in the face
of a powerful new technology.

108
00:06:13,440 --> 00:06:16,917
We believe this must
be one of those times.

109
00:06:17,000 --> 00:06:20,237
We need a mechanism for complementary
national and international frontier AI

110
00:06:20,320 --> 00:06:23,677
standards. Standards
for measuring capabilities,

111
00:06:23,760 --> 00:06:27,717
assessing risks, determining whether
safeguards are sufficient, and

112
00:06:27,800 --> 00:06:32,357
preserving meaningful human oversight
as systems become more autonomous.

113
00:06:32,440 --> 00:06:35,397
We need common standards so
countries can compare evidence,

114
00:06:35,480 --> 00:06:39,157
verify compliance, and have a shared
language and understanding about what is

115
00:06:39,240 --> 00:06:43,237
happening. We need to accurate
and speedy incident reporting,

116
00:06:43,320 --> 00:06:46,917
classification and reporting protocols
so the world can learn from failures

117
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:49,677
before they become catastrophes.

118
00:06:49,760 --> 00:06:52,757
And we need secure channels among
governments, critical infrastructure

119
00:06:52,840 --> 00:06:56,397
operators, and technical experts
to share emerging vulnerabilities and new

120
00:06:56,480 --> 00:06:59,837
threats. Obviously,
these standards should not

121
00:06:59,920 --> 00:07:03,677
lock in incumbents or favor
one business model over another.

122
00:07:03,760 --> 00:07:07,157
They must support open and closed model
developers, new entrants and established

123
00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:11,157
labs, national authority,
and international cooperation.

124
00:07:11,240 --> 00:07:14,077
Each government should decide how to
incorporate standards into its own legal

125
00:07:14,160 --> 00:07:18,237
system, but we will all be better off if
we can agree on what good evidence, good

126
00:07:18,320 --> 00:07:22,717
safeguards, and good oversight
look like on the global stage.

127
00:07:22,800 --> 00:07:26,557
We do not have all the answers,
and we're very open to any better ideas.

128
00:07:26,640 --> 00:07:29,397
We're ready to work with you all and try
our hardest to figure out the path

129
00:07:29,480 --> 00:07:33,397
forward. We are at a crossroads.

130
00:07:33,480 --> 00:07:37,717
One path leads to a world where power
is concentrated, decisions are opaque, and

131
00:07:37,800 --> 00:07:40,557
people feel that the most important
technology of their lifetime is

132
00:07:40,640 --> 00:07:44,917
something being done to them.
The other path leads to a world where AI

133
00:07:45,000 --> 00:07:49,317
works for people, because people,
through democratic institutions, help

134
00:07:49,400 --> 00:07:53,157
decide how it should develop and guide it.
Where scientific progress improves

135
00:07:53,240 --> 00:07:56,717
real lives, where more people can
participate in the future, and where

136
00:07:56,800 --> 00:08:00,117
this technology continues to give
individuals and communities greater

137
00:08:00,200 --> 00:08:02,357
power to live life as they choose.

138
00:08:02,440 --> 00:08:05,837
This is a future of realized potential,
excitement, and wonder, and it is the

139
00:08:05,920 --> 00:08:07,277
future we believe is worth building.

140
00:08:07,360 --> 00:08:10,160
Thank you very much.

141
00:08:10,880 --> 00:08:13,517
>> I thank Mr. Altman for his briefing.

142
00:08:13,600 --> 00:08:17,440
I now give the floor to Mr. Dario Amodei.

143
00:08:18,360 --> 00:08:22,317
>> Good afternoon. I'd like to thank
France for convening this meeting, and the

144
00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:26,640
members of the council
for inviting me to speak.