Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Jolyn Khoo, Nik Samoylov
2 min read 0

7

AI safetyExistential riskAnnouncements and updatesAI moratoriumOrganization updatesSlowing down AI
Frontpage
This is a linkpost for https://www.campaignforaisafety.org/uk-ai-summit-insights-moratorium-treaty-winners-pauseai-protests-recap-more/

Hi!

๐ŸŒ The UK is hosting an international AI safety summit on 1โ€”2 November at Bletchley Park. This event promises to gather world leaders, AI experts, and industry-shaping AI safety discussions. While attendees and specific topics remain undisclosed, it solidifies the UK's significance in AI safety discussions.

This presents an opportunity to engage with national governments to convince them to send delegates, propose experts to attend the summit itself, and of course to protest at the summit.

๐Ÿ”ฌ Our latest research

๐Ÿง‘โ€๐Ÿคโ€๐Ÿง‘ We commissioned an opinion poll with Roy Morgan (an Australian polling company) on perception of AI in Australia. A sizeable majority of 57% of Australians believe artificial intelligence (AI) creates more problems than it solves. Every fifth Australian anticipates the risk of human extinction from AI within two decades.

๐Ÿ“ƒ Moratorium treaty competition

๐ŸŒŸ We are thrilled to announce the winners of our Student AI Moratorium Treaty Competition fostering discussions on large-scale AI ethics and safety. 

๐Ÿฅ‡First Place: Neil Arven F. Tiozon, Jayson B. Corregidor, Anna Czarina C. Lee, 
๐ŸฅˆSecond Place: Ketan Aggarwal, 
๐Ÿฅ‰Third Place: Kanishk Kumar Singh. 

Explore submissions on our website (copyright waived), and stay tuned for insights from the competition. Congrats to the winners, participants worldwide, and our judges. Please share the news!

๐Ÿ“ธ #PauseAI protests

๐Ÿ“ฃ In a recent demonstration in The Hague, Netherlands, #PauseAI activists call upon their government for the prioritization of AI risk mitigation. During the event, they delivered impactful speeches, engaged with local residents, distributed informative flyers, and shared moments of camaraderie.

More info in the press release in both English and Dutch.

Upcoming PauseAI Protests
๐Ÿ“… Stay tuned for forthcoming international protests, scheduled to take place later this year, in anticipation of the AI Safety Summit. To ensure you receive an invitation when a protest is organized in your vicinity, join PauseAI community!

๐Ÿ“ƒ Policy updates

On the policy front, we have made our submission to the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence appointed by the Parliament of South Australia. Thank you Sue Anne Wong for the work on this submission.

Next, we are working on the following:

Do you know of other inquiries? Please let us know. You may respond to this email if you want to contribute to the upcoming consultation papers.

๐Ÿ“œPetition updates

๐Ÿฆ For our supporters in the UK, there's an ongoing petition by Greg Colbourn. This petition urges the global community to consider a global moratorium on AI technology development due to extinction risks. Currently, the petition gathered 40 signatures in support of this cause.

Thank you for your support! Please share this email with friends.

Campaign for AI Safety
campaignforaisafety.org

7

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
More from Jolyn Khoo
32
Updates from Campaign for AI Safety
2 authors
ยท ยท 2m read
2
2
View more
Curated and popular this week
LintzA
 ยท  ยท 15m read
 ยท 
Cross-posted to Lesswrong Introduction Several developments over the past few months should cause you to re-evaluate what you are doing. These include: 1. Updates toward short timelines 2. The Trump presidency 3. The o1 (inference-time compute scaling) paradigm 4. Deepseek 5. Stargate/AI datacenter spending 6. Increased internal deployment 7. Absence of AI x-risk/safety considerations in mainstream AI discourse Taken together, these are enough to render many existing AI governance strategies obsolete (and probably some technical safety strategies too). There's a good chance we're entering crunch time and that should absolutely affect your theory of change and what you plan to work on. In this piece I try to give a quick summary of these developments and think through the broader implications these have for AI safety. At the end of the piece I give some quick initial thoughts on how these developments affect what safety-concerned folks should be prioritizing. These are early days and I expect many of my takes will shift, look forward to discussing in the comments!  Implications of recent developments Updates toward short timelines Thereโ€™s general agreement that timelines are likely to be far shorter than most expected. Both Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have recently said they expect AGI within the next 3 years. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I know or have heard of who was expecting longer timelines has updated significantly toward short timelines (<5 years). E.g. Ajeyaโ€™s median estimate is that 99% of fully-remote jobs will be automatable in roughly 6-8 years, 5+ years earlier than her 2023 estimate. On a quick look, prediction markets seem to have shifted to short timelines (e.g. Metaculus[1] & Manifold appear to have roughly 2030 median timelines to AGI, though havenโ€™t moved dramatically in recent months). Weโ€™ve consistently seen performance on benchmarks far exceed what most predicted. Most recently, Epoch was surprised to see OpenAIโ€™s o3 model achi
Dr Kassim
 ยท  ยท 4m read
 ยท 
Hey everyone, Iโ€™ve been going through the EA Introductory Program, and I have to admit some of these ideas make sense, but others leave me with more questions than answers. Iโ€™m trying to wrap my head around certain core EA principles, and the more I think about them, the more I wonder: Am I misunderstanding, or are there blind spots in EAโ€™s approach? Iโ€™d really love to hear what others think. Maybe you can help me clarify some of my doubts. Or maybe you share the same reservations? Letโ€™s talk. Cause Prioritization. Does It Ignore Political and Social Reality? EA focuses on doing the most good per dollar, which makes sense in theory. But does it hold up when you apply it to real world contexts especially in countries like Uganda? Take malaria prevention. Itโ€™s a top EA cause because itโ€™s highly cost effective $5,000 can save a life through bed nets (GiveWell, 2023). But what happens when government corruption or instability disrupts these programs? The Global Fund scandal in Uganda saw $1.6 million in malaria aid mismanaged (Global Fund Audit Report, 2016). If money isnโ€™t reaching the people itโ€™s meant to help, is it really the best use of resources? And what about leadership changes? Policies shift unpredictably here. A national animal welfare initiative I supported lost momentum when political priorities changed. How does EA factor in these uncertainties when prioritizing causes? It feels like EA assumes a stable world where money always achieves the intended impact. But what if thatโ€™s not the world we live in? Long termism. A Luxury When the Present Is in Crisis? I get why long termists argue that future people matter. But should we really prioritize them over people suffering today? Long termism tells us that existential risks like AI could wipe out trillions of future lives. But in Uganda, weโ€™re losing lives nowโ€”1,500+ die from rabies annually (WHO, 2021), and 41% of children suffer from stunting due to malnutrition (UNICEF, 2022). These are preventable d
Rory Fenton
 ยท  ยท 6m read
 ยท 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I donโ€™t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but Iโ€™ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, โ€œMy money could fully solve this problemโ€. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but canโ€™t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if Iโ€™m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
Recent opportunities in AI safety
37
AIS Netherlands is looking for a Founding Executive Director (EOI form)
7 authors
ยท ยท 5m read
4
4
166
Forethought: A new AI macrostrategy group
5 authors
ยท ยท 4m read
6
6
20
Applications Open: Pivotal 2025 Q3 Research Fellowship
2 authors
ยท ยท 2m read
0
0
View more