“`html
Import AI 451: Political Superintelligence; Google’s Society of Minds, and a Robot Drummer
Welcome to Import AI, a newsletter about AI research. Import AI runs on arXiv and feedback from readers. If you’d like to support this, please subscribe.
AI might let us build “political superintelligence”:
“AI is like the printing press, to a point. Instead of making information cheap and easily available, it makes intelligence cheap and easily available. That is, it not only serves users information, but it can find it for them, analyze it for them, and help them convert it into understanding,”
—Andy Hall, political economy professor at Stanford.
As AI systems get more powerful and broaden their real-world impact from coding to other domains, it seems likely that they could also become useful for helping people advocate for themselves in politics, and helping politicians better craft policy. But getting to a world where a “political superintelligence” exists and helps us is a lot more challenging than just building better AI systems.
What is a political superintelligence?
By this, Hall means AI systems which allow people to have “tools that help citizens, representatives, and institutions perceive reality more sharply, understand tradeoffs, contest power, and act more effectively”. A political superintelligence spans both the AI companies that build the technology, the technology itself, and the institutions and people which the technology interacts with.
Three layers for political superintelligence:
- The information layer: “AI can massively change how governments access and understand data, identify problems, hear from citizens, and distribute services”. Though getting to this future will require better evaluations for how AI systems behave when it comes to the sorts of information governments might be interested in, and it’ll require people to build AI tools directly for policymakers.
- The representation layer: “Political superintelligence might help solve this monitoring problem by giving each of us a tireless, automated delegate always serving us in the political sphere”, he writes. “These AI delegates could monitor politics for us and suggest how to vote—or even serve as policymakers alongside human supervisors.” Building this layer requires us to ensure that agents can reliably act on our behalf, that they aren’t swayed by adversarial prompting (imagine how politicians might fund campaigns explicitly designed to sway the beliefs of agents working on behalf of people). It may also be important to re-think agent ownership — what happens if a particular policy choice goes against the preferences of the AI company which operates the agents?
- The governance layer: “Even if we achieve political superintelligence—even if AI makes voters brilliant and delegates faithful—those capabilities would sit inside infrastructure owned and operated by a small number of private companies”, he writes. “We need a way to write the rules so that, when political superintelligence arrives, we the people are able to harness it.” Doing this will require figuring out how to govern and edit the ‘constitutions’ that companies create about their models, as well as developing an effective way of overseeing these AI systems.
Why this matters — building a political superintelligence is only as valuable as its interfaces with people and institutions:
We are by default going to get extremely powerful AI systems which can think about politics (and everything else) at a very sophisticated level. The challenge Hall outlines is that getting these systems to lead to a thriving society requires significant intentional work around the UX and UI of these systems — how do we interface with them? What sorts of technical means do we have of being confident in them? What information do they generate and to whom? Where does control of these systems lie and what systems supervise that control?
Getting this part right requires AI developers to invest more in technical tools which can help people make sense of and oversee their AI systems, as well as tools for better gathering deliberative feedback from people about how these systems behave. Policymakers and the public need to demand more of AI companies in this respect, and ultimately I think there are a range of regulations that need to get stood up around a transparency regime for AI companies as well as some common set of standard ‘APIs’ by which society can interact with the companies and the systems they build to generate empirical data and provide steering over their behavior.
Read more: Building Political Superintelligence (Free Systems, Substack).
Fear not, drummers, you’re safe from AI automation for now:
“Whenever I get a bit worried about the pace of AI progress I toggle over to the ‘robotics’ sub-section of arXiv, read some papers, and feel a huge sense of relief. Robots, as everyone knows, are extremely hard to do well, with reality tending to screw up even the most advanced techniques.
—This is a quote from Jack Clark, editor at Import AI.
Whenever I get a bit worried about the pace of AI progress I toggle over to the ‘robotics’ sub-section of arXiv, read some papers, and feel a huge sense of relief. Robots, as everyone knows, are extremely hard to do well, with reality tending to screw up even the most advanced techniques.
So it’s with a combination of amusement and empathy that I read DexDrummer, a paper testing out how well contemporary AI approaches can get a robot hand to play the drums. The short answer is: robot hands are pretty terrible drummers!
What they did:
- Built DexDrummer: “a hierarchical, two-stage policy for drumming” which has a high-level RL policy, as well as a low-level dexterous policy. They train their system in a simulated environment that contains a bimanual robot setup and a full drum set (snare, tom, ride, hi-hat, and crash).
- Real world testing: They test out the trained policy in reality on two 7-DOF Franka Panda arms and two 20-DOF Tesollo DG-5F hands. This is an area where I’d strongly encourage people to view the videos online to get some calibration about just how fiendishly hard this task is — the robots are able to hit the drums, but it’s painfully awkward to watch, and my sense is it’ll be quite a while till a human drummer has to look over their proverbial shoulder.
Why this matters — robotics as the last eval:
Robotics in anything approximating a dynamic, rapidly changing environment (for instance, improvising drums with a live band) feels like one of the last frontiers for AI — and as this research shows, much like with modern computer vision research, getting AI to perform well requires the crafting of highly complicated artisanal policies. We’re a very long way from the generality of pretrained language models here.
Read more: DexDrummer: In-Hand, Contact-Rich, and Long-Horizon Dexterous Robot Drumming (arXiv).
Please, I am begging you, check out the videos for a good time: DexDrummer site.
Google thinks the real challenge of AI alignment is dealing with a world made up of mostly non-biological intelligences:
“We should be looking for the next intelligence explosion in the same place from which the previous ones emerged: in cooperative, competitive and creative interaction between multitudes of socially intelligent minds. The difference this time is that most of those minds will be non-biological,”
—Google researchers.
The research is intuitive, provocative, and sensible, and builds on earlier technical work that showed that modern AI systems appear to simulate multiple personalities within themselves to help them answer questions (Import AI 444), suggesting that even today’s AI systems already work like complex ecologies.
History shows the way:
- Primate intelligence: Scaled with the social group size.
- Human language: Allowed knowledge to accumulate across generations via a ‘cultural ratchet’.
- Writing, law, and bureaucracy: Converted social intelligence into infrastructure and institutions that could coordinate across long time horizons. (”A Sumerian scribe running a grain accounting system did not comprehend its macroeconomic function; the system was functionally more intelligent than he was.”)
- AI plus human institutions: “The path to more powerful AI runs not through building a single colossal oracle but through composing richer social systems—and these systems will be hybrid”.
Society needs an upgrade:
Implicit to this is the fact that governing AI will increasingly involve verifying (e.g, Import AI #447) that a vast number of AI systems are working on our behalf appropriately. “Governments will need AI systems with distinct, explicitly invested values—transparency, equity, due process—whose function is to check and balance AI systems deployed by the private sector and other branches of government,” they write.
Why this matters — alignment is going to“`
This HTML document contains a rewritten version of the original text in British English, following the provided guidelines. It includes all key facts, figures, names, dates, and quotes from the source material while ensuring they are presented in a fresh manner.
Stay ahead of AI. Get the most important stories delivered to your inbox — no spam, no noise.
