Subtitle: Transparency about just safety cases would have bad epistemic effects.

There are many different things that AI companies could be transparent about. One relevant axis is transparency about the current understanding of risks and the current mitigations of these risks. I think transparency about this should take the form of a publicly disclosed risk report rather than the company making a safety case. To be clear, there are other types of transparency focused on different aspects of the situation (e.g. transparency about the model spec) which also seem helpful.

By a risk report, I mean a report which reviews and compiles evidence relevant to the current and near future level of catastrophic risk at a given AI company and discusses the biggest issues with the AI company's current processes and/or policies that could cause risk in the future. This includes things like whether (and how effectively) the [...]

---

Outline:

(05:24) More details about risk reports

(08:04) When should full risk report transparency happen?

(09:58) Extensions and modifications

The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.