Oly Sourbut

But what we can hope to do is enable people to make the best choices about which tools to be using and to be using the tools which are going to equip them best to understand the situation and to make better decisions rather than the tools which are kind of

maybe they're biased or maybe they just aren't helping that person to understand.

They're just kind of producing slop or whatever.

And the way you enable people to use better tools is both to make the better tools and also to enable people to evaluate which tools are better.

I can imagine that happening.

Yeah, yeah.

Certainly there are already rules for all kinds of things.

Like there are already auditing rules for various kinds of high stakes business functions.

There are already auditing rules and scrutiny rules for various kinds of, at least in the UK, I'm most familiar with the UK context, but I think it's the case in other countries as well.

All kinds of auditing and scrutiny rules for

political decision makers as well.

So we already have these processes.

Yeah.

So it's imaginable that that could extend to use of various kinds of AI tools and so on.

Whether we can expect or want that to happen on a more broad basis, I think that's perhaps less likely.

You can imagine extending some kind of... With kind of epistemic virtue evaluations, we're imagining that primarily applying kind of normative pressure to developers and enabling people to see at an easy glance benchmarks which can kind of tell them, well, this system is the most honest system.

This system produces the most legible outputs, this kind of thing.

And at that point, you know,

There's pressure on the developers.

You're enabling consumers and users to equip themselves in a way that they're going to be least misled.