Manuel Allgaier

co-director @ European Network for AI Safety
918 karmaJoined Working (0-5 years)10365 Berlin, Germany

Bio

Participation
8

Co-Director @ENAIS, connecting researchers and policy-makers for safe AI 
Formerly director of EA Germany, EA Berlin and EAGxBerlin 2022 

Happy to connect with people with shared interests. Message me with ideas, proposals, feedback, connections or just random thoughts!

https://www.linkedin.com/in/manuelallgaier/

How others can help me

Collaborators and funding to accelerate AI safety and AI governance careers (subsidized tickets, travel grants, message me for details), feedback for our work at ENAIS

How I can help others

Contacts in European AI safety & AI governance ecosystem, feedback on your strategy, projects, career plans, possibly collaborations

Comments
130

Update: Pushing for messenger interoperability (part of EU Digital Markets Act) might be more tractable and more helpful.

Forwarding private comment from a friend: Interoperability was part of Digital Markets Act, so EVP Ribera will be main enforcer, and was asked about her stance in her EU parliament confirmation hearing yesterday. You could watch that / write her team abt the underrated cybersecurity benefits of interoperability esp. given it would upgrade WhatsApp's encryption. 

Curious to get your thoughts on this too! 

Thanks for looking up their funding situations, appreciate it! 

I meant neglected as in "they don't seem to prioritize it for whichever reason", not necessarily funding- or capacity-constraints.

I see how they might not want to implement some of these features, though even in the case of "show message history" to new members, there could be more elegant solutions like giving members the option to opt-in to sharing their messages with new people in the group. 

Other features like "enabling community chats / supergroup" or "better chat archiving & sorting chats in folders" seem not in conflict with privacy, at least not obviously. Generally they do seem to copy many features from other messengers (they recently launched stories, similar to Whatsapp status), they just seem a lot slower than Whatsapp and Telegram to adopt these things and far behind. 

Update: Pushing for messenger interoperability (part of EU Digital Markets Act) might be more tractable and more helpful.

Forwarding private comment from a friend: Interoperability was part of Digital Markets Act, so EVP Ribera will be main enforcer, and was asked about her stance in her EU parliament confirmation hearing yesterday. You could watch that / write her team abt the underrated cybersecurity benefits of interoperability esp. given it would upgrade WhatsApp's encryption


TLDR: Improving Signal (messenger) seems important, [edit: maybe] neglected and tractable. Thoughts? Can we help? 

Signal (similar to Whatsapp) is the only truly privacy-friendly popular messenger I know. Whatsapp and Telegram also offer end-to-end encryption (Telegram only in "secret chats") but they still collect metadata like your contacts, and many people I meet strongly prefer Signal for various reasons: Some people work in cybersecurity and have strong privacy preferences, others dislike Telegram (bad rep, popular among conspiratists, spam) and Meta (Whatsapp owner). For some vulnerable people such activists in authoritarian regimes or whistleblowers in powerful organizations, secure messaging seems essential, and Signal seems to be the best tool we have. 

While Signal is improving, I still often find it annoying to use compared to Telegram. Here just some examples:

1) it's easily overwhelming: No sorting chats in folders, archiving group chats doesn't really work (they keep popping back to 'unarchived' whenever someone writes a new message), lots of notifications I don't care about like "user xyz changed their security number" and no way to turn them off

2) no option to make chat history visible to new group members, which is really annoying for some use cases

3) no poll feature, no live location sharing

4) no "community"/supergroup feature, people need to find and manually join all different groups in a community

5) no threads (in Telegram that's possible in announcement channels)

I wouldn't be surprised if we're collectively losing thousands or even millions of productive hours and valuable attention on Signal (I would strongly recommend Slack over Signal, but for some use cases or some users Slack doesn't work). This seems high in scope, neglected and tractable to me. 

Curious to get your thoughts on: 
a) Disagree with my argument? Am I missing anything?
b) What's the bottleneck of Signal? Is it a matter of prioritization, funding/talent (edit: probably not, see harfe's comment), or something else? Does anyone have insights? 
c) Can we help? How? 

9.7/10 average rating* is extremely good. Well done!

Also cool to see the Nigerian and African EA community growing. Keep us updated!

(*I don't think average rating is the most important metric, the expected impact from the conference seems more important, but it's a useful metric nevertheless)

Are you still active? The website seems offline.

This seems pretty bad news from an AI safety perspective :/ 

Any chance to override his veto, or get a similar bill passed soon? 

@Jeff Kaufman Would you like to respond to this? Do you feel like this addresses your concerns sufficiently? Any updates in either direction?

I just skimmed it due to time constraints, but from what I read and from the reactions this looks like a very thoughtful response, and at least a short reply seems appropriate. 

If anyone here also would like more context on this, I found @Garrison's reporting from 16 August quite insightful: 

The Tech Industry is the Biggest Blocker to Meaningful AI Safety Regulations

Thank you for the comprehensive research! California state policy as a lever for AI regulation hasn't been much on my radar yet, and as a European concerned about AI risk, I found this very insightful. Curious if you (or anyone here) have thoughts on the following:

1) Is there anything we can and should do right now? Any thoughts on Holly's "tell your reps to vote yes on SB 1047" post from last week? Anything else we can do?

2) How do you see the potential for California state regulation in the next few years. Should we invest more resources in this, relative to US AI policy?
 

Load more