The EU AI Act’s Code of Practise (Safety and Security chapter) mandates external evaluations for systemic risks. That’s definitely a start—so regulations are getting there.
I think the way the Act is setup is that labs do their testing and external orgs add an extra perspective so it’s not just labs high five-ing themselves.
Isn’t some overlap in personnel to be expected considering that the AI Safety field is small?
Also, I fail to see how evals take away from passing new regulations. Evals are, like other work in this field, building tech that will be only adopted / impactful when complemented with governance / regulations or some other incentives.
Going through your beliefs -
The EU AI Act’s Code of Practise (Safety and Security chapter) mandates external evaluations for systemic risks. That’s definitely a start—so regulations are getting there.
I think the way the Act is setup is that labs do their testing and external orgs add an extra perspective so it’s not just labs high five-ing themselves.
Isn’t some overlap in personnel to be expected considering that the AI Safety field is small?
Also, I fail to see how evals take away from passing new regulations. Evals are, like other work in this field, building tech that will be only adopted / impactful when complemented with governance / regulations or some other incentives.