Half of British adults are already worried about losing their jobs to AI. | Cristobal Herrera-Ulashkevich/EPA
Michael Birtwistle, associate director of AI law and regulation at the Ada Lovelace Institute, said “transformative AI,” which is defined by the technology’s societal impacts rather than its inherent properties, is a more useful concept for government to consider than AGI.
“If you’re going to bet on the hype of a technology with the public purse, you should be anticipating what its transformative effects might be — jobs, environment, public services, public benefit,” he said. “If that’s in scope for this work then it sounds sensible.”
Industry representatives, meanwhile, argue there’s little value in worrying about AGI if British businesses fail to adopt and invest in AI in the first place.
One corporate lobbyist, granted anonymity to speak frankly about their interactions with government, said DSIT’s interest in AGI feels disconnected from the reality on the ground, where business leaders are debating whether to invest in AI. A recent study by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that 95 percent of AI pilots by businesses fail to meaningfully increase revenue.
On Wednesday, Kyle announced measures to strengthen the market for independent assessment of AI systems in a bid to increase adoption by bolstering trust in the technology, a focus industry groups have argued has been missing from government policy to date.
Labour MPs and advisers are also aware of the need to ensure the government’s AI efforts translate into tangible benefits for voters, with DSIT planning to increase its messaging on how all parts of the country can benefit over coming months.
“My worry is that we do not concentrate enough on the benefits and articulate those,” Science Minister Patrick Vallance said this week.
“We have work to do to get that message out and to ensure that it is understood and believed.”