Joseph is a Programme Associate at the Tech Governance Project, where he works on emerging technology governance, with a growing focus on frontier AI risks, governance, and research. He has spent over five years previously working with nonprofit and civil society organisations in Nigeria, mainly in programme management, community engagement, climate change and civic initiatives. He co-founded AI Safety Hub Nigeria, where he worked on helping high-agency Nigerians and African professionals find and explore pathways that best fit into AI safety. He is still early in his AI safety career and is currently building his technical AI governance research skills, particularly around AI evaluations, governance, and safety.
Reading this piece feels like you are literally perusing my mind and penning it so beautifully. I have been trying to write about the very concerning thoughts I have (after reading a lot of different reports) about the seemingly nonchalant attitude of the labs about a system that is widely believed to be able to "kill us all". The fact that both leading labs had invariably responded, "We don't know," to most of these incidents is really a concern that is yet to dissipate in my thoughts, plus there is no factual assurance that the labs would stop or pause building more powerful models anytime soon with the current trajectory of US-China competition, except maybe some PR-motivated comment I see around; it feels scary to some extent. The fact that external evaluators like METR and Redwood had to operate at the mercy of the labs was a kind of concern for me as well. I think there is a need for a mandatory level of independent evaluation of these labs (like the third-party Training-Run Assessments) before any further push to deploy more powerful models to provide a holistic understanding of the real situation. Perhaps one line from Benjamin Todd that is a bit reassuring to me is that RSI isn't happening at the labs yet, or maybe we just don't know yet.
Thanks for the nudge. Â I think I've been a silent reader on the forum for a while and didn't feel the need to write my bio. I guess I just feel like writing such may be more suitable for people with more experience in the EA field. I'll give it a try anyways.
Well said Seun, we know that international donors would cut their funding sooner than later, if they haven't yet because its always been about interest and trade, even if it's gradual. However, what we should even be more concerned about is the crops of African leaders who values winning their next elections than the future of the next generations.Â
Impressive! A big "Weldone" to the TGov team. With your approach, dedication and achievement in just few months, I believe the TGov initiative will be a game-changer for Africa's emerging technologies governance. Â
However, I have two concerns running through my mind :
African Leaders are used to receiving policy recommendations but with little political will for implementation. How will you ensure your policy suggestions are really implemented?
Also, Are there any contingency plan perhaps for unforseen obstacles that can hinder TGovs work like Geopolitical crises in pilot countries, key personnel or team member departure? etc...
I must say the EA Nigeria Summit was really profound for me as an attendee. I had the opportunity to meet with other altruist and exchange ideas and also learn better ways to improve my work as well as my personal life from the various presentations from the speakers. It was really an epiphany moment for me.
This is really great
Wow! This is really great. I look forward to an impactful 2024 with the  EA Nigeria communityÂ