A guide for policy-makers: - Evaluating rapidly developing technologies including AI, large language models

The path from principle to practice is poorly defined, but given the nature and cadence of AI development and application, the variety of interest involved and the range of possible applications, any approach cannot be overly generic or prescriptive. [...] The purpose of the framework is to provide a tool to inform all stakeholders – including governments, trade negotiators, regulators, civil society and industry – of the evolution of these technologies to help them frame how they might consider the implications, positive or negative, of the technology itself, and more specifically its particular application. [...] 6 The preliminary framework was derived from previous work and thinking, including the International Network for Governmental Science Advice’s (INGSA) report on digital wellbeing3 and the OECD Framework for the Classification of AI Systems,4 to present the totality of the potential opportunities, risks and impacts of AI. [...] Many have specifically endorsed the recommendation to develop an adaptive framework that allows for deliberate and proactive consideration of the risks and implications of the technology, and in doing so, always considers the totality of dimensions from the individual to society and systems. [...] In particular, the ISC tLord Martin Rees, former President of the Royal Society and Co-Founder of the Centre for the Study of Existential Risks, University of Cambridge; Professor Shivaji Sondhi, Professor of Physics, University of Oxford; Professor K Vijay Raghavan, former Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India; Amandeep Singh Gill, the UN Secretary General’s Envoy on Technology;.