"Collective intelligence requires a broader reimagining of technology and democracy" #TEDTalks

Almost threearters of people agree that AI should protect free speech. 90% not be racist or sexist. Only around 50% think that AI should be funny, though, so there's still contentious issues out there. These last statistics are from our collective constitution project with Anthropic, where we retrained one of the world's most powerful language models on principles written by a thousand representative Americans, not AI developers or regulators or researchers at elite universities. We built on a way of training AI that relies on a written set of principles or a constitution. We compared it to a model that researchers had come up with. But the people's model trained on the co-written constitution was just as capable and more fair than the model the researchers had come up with. People with little to no experience in AI did better than researchers who work on this full-time in building a fairer chatbot. Maybe I shouldn't have been surprised. As one of our participants from another process said, "They may be experts in AI, but I have eight grandchildren. I know how to pick good values. " Of course, these processes aren't enough. Collective intelligence requires a broader reimagining of technology and democracy. That's why we're also working on co-ownership models for the data that AI is built on, which after all belongs to all of us, and using AI itself to create new and better decision-making processes, taking advantage of the things that language models can do that humans can't, like processing huge amounts of text input.