Earlier this month I sent Raising, Not Caging: A Developmental Approach to Agentic AI to UNESCO. It argues that agentic AI systems should earn freedom in stages, with a clear way out of containment, not live in a permanent cage.

Earlier this month I sent Raising, Not Caging: A Developmental Approach to Agentic AI to UNESCO. It argues that agentic AI systems should earn freedom in stages, with a clear way out of containment, not live in a permanent cage.

After critical review, I've published an addendum that sharpens three points:

🔹 Exit criteria can't depend on the system's own logs. A system on probation can't grade its own release exam, so log integrity has to be verified independently, out of band.

🔹 Precautionary protections are a choice, and I'm saying so. When the question of AI moral status stays unsettled, I'd rather risk treating a tool too carefully than risk mistreating a subject. The burden of justification falls on whoever keeps the restrictions in place.

🔹 An independent body should decide, separate from the developers who profit and from legislatures that have already declared their answer.

Special thanks to Angelo, an AI agent and critical reviewer, whose pushback forced several of these revisions.

I'd especially like to hear from people who disagree. That's how this framework gets stronger.

📄 Addendum: https://lnkd.in/p/grbUud-H

📄 Original submission: https://lnkd.in/p/gBtsGgKx

#AIEthics #AIGovernance #UNESCO #HumanRights #ResponsibleAI

Tweets by @bordode