Evaluating and measuring AI Safety Level (ASL) threats are crucial for guiding stakeholders to implement safeguards that keep risks within acceptable limits. ASL-3+ models present a unique risk in their ability to uplift novice non-state actors, especially in the realm of biosecurity. Existing evaluation metrics, such as LAB-Bench, BioLP-bench, and WMDP, can reliably assess model uplift and domain knowledge. However, metrics that better contextualize "real-world risks" are needed to inform the safety case for LLMs, along with scalable, open-ended metrics to keep pace with their rapid advancements. To address both gaps, we introduce MOCET, an interpretable and doubly-scalable metric (automatable and open-ended) that can quantify real-world risks.

Over the last year, governments, academia, and industry have invested considerable resources into investigating the harms of advanced AI. But one massive factor seems to be continuously overlooked: right now, AI's primary tests and models are confined to English. Advanced AI could be used in many languages to cause harm, but focusing primarily on English may leave us with only part of the answer. It also ignores those most vulnerable to its harms. After the release of ChatGPT in November, 2022, AI developers expressed surprise at a capability displayed by the model: It could "speak" at least 80 languages, not just English.

The central factor that distinguishes autonomous weapons from remotely controlled weapons is human control. Lethal weapon systems in which target selection and the manner of target engagement are not subject to human control but are left to artificial intelligence (AI) are problematic from both ethical and legal perspectives. Elon Musk, 160 research and business organizations, and experts from the Stop Killer Robots campaign called against building autonomous weapons systems in 2018. In doing so, they raised awareness of the threat of autonomous weapons for the first time. In principle, most objects can become weapons (Bendel, 2019, page 321). Examples include bicycle chains, screwdrivers, or scissors.

The relevance of the video is that the browser identified the application being used by the IAI as Google Earth and, according to the OSC 2006 report, the Arabic-language caption reads Islamic Army in Iraq/The Military Engineering Unit – Preparations for Rocket Attack, the video was recorded in 5/1/2006, we provide, in Appendix A, a reproduction of the screenshot picture made available in the OSC report. Now, prior to the release of this video demonstration of the use of Google Earth to plan attacks, in accordance with the OSC 2006 report, in the OSC-monitored online forums, discussions took place on the use of Google Earth as a GEOINT tool for terrorist planning. On August 5, 2005 the user "Al-Illiktrony" posted a message to the Islamic Renewal Organization forum titled A Gift for the Mujahidin, a Program To Enable You to Watch Cities of the World Via Satellite, in this post the author dedicated Google Earth to the mujahidin brothers and to Shaykh Muhammad al-Mas'ari, the post was replied in the forum by "Al-Mushtaq al-Jannah" warning that Google programs retain complete information about their users. This is a relevant issue, however, there are two caveats, given the amount of Google Earth users, it may be difficult for Google to flag a jihadist using the functionality in time to prevent an attack plan, one possible solution would be for Google to flag computers based on searched websites and locations, for instance to flag computers that visit certain critical sites, but this is a problem when landmarks are used, furthermore, and this is the second caveat, one may not use one's own computer to produce the search or even mask the IP address. On October 3, 2005, as described in the OSC 2006 report, in a reply to a posting by Saddam Al-Arab on the Baghdad al-Rashid forum requesting the identification of a roughly sketched map, "Almuhannad" posted a link to a site that provided a free download of Google Earth, suggesting that the satellite imagery from Google's service could help identify the sketch.

Military applications of artificial intelligence, we are told, are poised to transform military power. They might make the oceans transparent to sensor systems, threatening at-sea nuclear deterrent systems like the UK's Trident. They might enable autonomous aircraft that could outfight human crewed planes. They could transform intelligence processing in war, enable all sorts of complex weapons that would make things like tanks and aircraft carriers yesterday's news. The sky, it appears, is the limit. In this light, big states are making large investments in military AI. One aspect of the UK's recent Integrated Review (ahem, "Global Britain in a Competitive Age") and Command Paper (ahem, "Defence in a competitive age") is a bet that investment in military applications of artifical intelligence will offset cuts to things like tanks and troop numbers.

Inaugurating a five-day global virtual summit on artificial intelligence (AI), Responsible AI for Social Empowerment or RAISE 2020, Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted how the use of AI will empower India and also warned against the pitfalls. In June, India along with Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand and others joined together to create the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) for the responsible development and use of AI. Algorithm transparency is key to establishing this trust. This will create an e-education unit to boost the digital infrastructure, digital content and capacity. Under this programme, more than 11,000 students from schools completed the basic course.

The potential use of drones to cripple as much as half of Saudi national oil production this week highlights a growing threat in modern-day conflict. The attack has shown that Saudi Arabia -- the world's third largest defence spender -- is incapable of defending arguably its most protected non-military installation in Abqaiq. It is estimated to have halted around 5 per cent of international crude output, has shocked markets and spiked prices globally. Only a decade ago, such an attack by a low-cost, remote weapon systems was largely unthinkable. And players on the world stage have seized on the shift, with groups such as Islamic State and Mexican drug cartels creating their own improvised explosive vehicles from rudimentary hobby kits purchased online and in stores.

As artificial intelligence continues to evolve, it is having profound impact on a range of sectors seemingly unrelated to it, such as international relations. Some countries are pursuing AI more or less within the confines of international law and generally accepted principles of doing business, while others are choosing to do what is necessary to attempt to achieve AI supremacy outside those boundaries. In the process, AI is slowly altering the balance of power between global actors and among alliances in a number of ways. Just as becoming adept in the cyber arena levels the playing field – giving countries such as Iran and North Korea the ability to go head to head with China, Russia and that US in cyber space – the pursuit of AI supremacy is providing an increased competitive edge in international business to some smaller, otherwise less competitive nations, enhancing their ability to secure preferential trade and investment arrangements with other countries, raising their global profile, and enabling them to progress into previously unimagined areas of international trade, investment, and diplomacy. How AI is deployed by governments can have serious consequences in international relations, particularly if a given government has unusual capabilities in the AI arena.

Artificial intelligence (AI), a subset of machine learning, has the potential to drastically impact a nation's national security in various ways. Coined as the next space race, the race for AI dominance is both intense and necessary for nations to remain primary in an evolving global environment. As technology develops so does the amount of virtual information and the ability to operate at optimal levels when taking advantage of this data. Furthermore, the proper use and implementation of AI can facilitate a nation in the achievement of information, economic, and military superiority – all ingredients to maintaining a prominent place on the global stage. According to Paul Scharre, "AI today is a very powerful technology. Many people compare it to a new industrial revolution in its capacity to change things. It is poised to change not only the way we think about productivity but also elements of national power."AI is not only the future for economic and commercial power, but also has various military applications with regard to national security for each and every aspiring global power.

The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots has called on the UN to ban the development and use of autonomous weapons: those that can identify, track and attack targets without meaningful human oversight. On Monday, the group released a sensationalist video, supported by some prominent artificial intelligence researchers, depicting a dystopian future in which such machines run wild. I am gratified that my colleagues are volunteering their efforts to ensure beneficial uses of artificial intelligence (AI) technology. But I am unconvinced of the effectiveness of the campaign beyond a symbolic gesture. Even though I identify myself strongly as a pacifist, I have reservations about signing up to the proposed ban.