Consider a large company that wants to make the best use of AI, while maintaining control over it, so that it can run itself profitably, compete effectively, and avoid disastrous legal or technical mistakes. Regardless of whether AI keeps getting better or plateaus, or whether the AI bubble pops sooner or later, every single large company in the world must learn to safely apply AI or it will not be able to compete.
Each company must establish evolving policies and specific practices on the use of AI, because safety and success with AI do not happen without careful governance. But you know what you can do without careful leadership: spend millions of dollars on tokens with no clear idea what you got and did not get for all that money.
I suggest that such companies need something like a VP of AI Governance, or VP of AI Quality Engineering. That person would need a small team of analysts who would track AI technology trends and experiment with methods of using and controlling AI, in collaboration with IT and R&D personnel.
I am surprised I have not already been offered a job like this– because I would be perfect for it, either as the leader or as a member of the team that supports the leader.
What Would This Team Do?
AIQE team members would experiment with AI and follow up on outside research. They would also monitor and orchestrate practical experimentation with AI within IT and R&D. The purpose of this experimentation would be to identify and manage opportunities and risks in the use of AI to run the business. The team would also monitor AI usage in the company, and report to top management on ongoing risks, benefits, and costs. In the event of government regulation, this team would also track compliance and manage communication with regulatory authorities.
Small companies, with little to lose, can just try things willy-nilly. Large companies cannot lightly take on large risks, so they must be more careful. A small measure of bureaucracy creates safety.
Why You Should Consider Hiring Me For This
First, because I have prestige in the arena of critical thinking about software, otherwise known as software testing. Ask ChatGPT who I am. I’ve written three books. I’ve been practicing how to productively report technical risk for decades. Whoever you hire should be someone with a public reputation for speaking truth to power. It may be important to have someone who not only can do the job, but will be seen as someone who will do the job.
Next, apart from dedicating myself to software testing and quality engineering for decades, I have been particularly spending my time teaching it, and finding ways to teach it. I have a passion and track record for evangelizing responsible behavior in engineering. This role requires leadership and the ability to persuade.
The role also requires a certain assertiveness. It requires telling people things they probably don’t want to hear. You can’t be a mere people-pleaser and do this job well.
In the last several years, I’ve been experimenting specifically with testing AI, as well as using AI in testing. I and my colleagues developed the Principles of Responsible Work, which is grounded in research about AI-related hazards. We are technologists who are also humanists. We appreciate our tools but we put people first.
Maybe You’d Rather Hire Someone Else, But the Point Remains…
There are lots of people out there who are prestigious AI safety researchers. I have no standing in that community.
There are many people who do not have a public reputation, and there are certainly people in the testing and quality engineering field who have a softer or more conventional approach to the work than I do. Perhaps you believe in a lower key approach to this challenge. I would be more of a bold choice.
There are people more willing and able to travel, or to work long days than I am.
Anyway, consider talking to me about it. Or look at some of the videos on the YouTube RST channel. My contact information is right here on this site.
Leave a Reply