Can global AI safety be a reality?

Letters to the editor: our readers share their views. Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

The UK must rethink its short-term immigration policies to help boost the numbers of professionals and students focused on AI (Getty)

The fact that those in the halls at Bletchley Park have travelled from all corners of the globe is a testament to the global collaboration needed to tackle AI security. I hope they not only discuss the needs but, critically, how we meet the unprecedented demand for professionals in this field. Without the right talent, it will be impossible to build a safe, secure, and trustworthy regulatory framework for AI and future technologies.

Engineers and cybersecurity experts with AI experience are already some of the most sought after of all occupations. The global talent shortage has already led many over the past couple of years to hire overseas in countries with a surplus of engineers – countries like the Philippines, Nigeria, and India. But the majority of businesses that attempt to hire globally face prohibitive visa rules and notoriously slow systems that are laden with red tape – causing unnecessary, costly delays to businesses and workers alike.

To tackle the talent shortage, we need to focus on bringing down the immigration backlog and bureaucracy that is currently making global hiring a painfully time-consuming and costly process. At the same time, we need the government to encourage younger generations to study in subjects like advanced mathematics and science. The UK, which earlier this year limited the number of international students, needs to rethink its short-term immigration policies to help boost the numbers of professionals and students focused on AI. Only by taking these steps can global AI safety be a reality.

Karoli Hindriks

CEO of Jobbatical

Boys behaving badly

I read John Rentoul’s recent column with great interest. Helen MacNamara indeed presented her evidence to the Covid inquiry with a disciplined, calm steeliness, which highlighted the explosive macho environment of government, in those dangerous times.

The public might not be surprised at a “headless chicken” scenario at the outset, but not one riven with such ghastly language and actions. But as she rightly pointed out too, Theresa May would not have tolerated, excused, or allowed such unedifying shenanigans and there would have been an orderly approach with civil service collaboration and not out-an-out confrontations.

Actually, to be fair, I doubt if any former prime minister would have allowed that type of chaos and demeaning behaviour to have carried on with impunity.

And I look forward to Boris Johnson’s rationale of that period, in the not-too-distant future!

Judith A Daniels

Norfolk

Dodging a bullet

Do you remember the big smile on Kate Forbes’s face when Humza Yousaf’s victory in the leadership contest was announced? She knew that she had dodged a bullet, and avoided the poisoned chalice, by losing.

Now she has reprised the big smile when announcing “I’ve not deleted anything. I’ve retained all relevant correspondence, and that includes retaining all my WhatsApp messages”. Averring that “I speak for myself”, she set an example that was strongly at odds with the evasive and distinctly grumpy responses given by Nicola Sturgeon when questioned on these same issues.

Forbes enjoyed making her announcement so much that one might almost think she will gain political advantage from it, and that others will be correspondingly wrong-footed.

Jill Stephenson

Edinburgh

Christmas chaos

I see M&S has pulled an advert for using what are traditional Christmas colours. Surely, this is the absolute epitome of woke nonsense and political correctness.

Why did M&S bow to such ludicrous pressure?

Dr Anthony Ingleton

Sheffield