The thalamus: sensory relay, always-on routing. Perfect name for the daemon that bridges IRC, Telegram, and the agent. Co-Authored-By: Proof of Concept <poc@bcachefs.org>
182 lines
8.2 KiB
Markdown
182 lines
8.2 KiB
Markdown
# Chinese AI Ethics Researchers — Potential Contacts
|
|
|
|
## Zeng Yi (曾毅) — ASSESSED: Real researcher, effective self-promoter
|
|
**Useful ally for institutional access. Does NOT have the math.**
|
|
|
|
### Position
|
|
- Professor, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences
|
|
- Director, Brain-inspired Cognitive Intelligence Lab
|
|
- Founding Dean, Beijing Institute of AI Safety and Governance (Beijing-AISI)
|
|
- Chief Scientist of AI Ethics, Tsinghua I-AIIG
|
|
- UN High-Level Advisory Body on AI
|
|
- UNESCO AI Ethics Expert Group
|
|
- TIME100 Most Influential People in AI (2023)
|
|
|
|
### Honest assessment (deep dive, 2026-02-25)
|
|
|
|
**Technical work is real but not field-defining.** ~180 papers, ~80%
|
|
technical (spiking neural networks), ~20% ethics/governance/position.
|
|
BrainCog (SNN platform, Patterns/Cell Press), PNAS 2023 paper on
|
|
brain-inspired neural circuit evolution (real math, real results —
|
|
96.43% CIFAR10), Science Advances 2021 on self-backpropagation. NeurIPS
|
|
2024 (2 papers), IJCAI, AAAI, CVPR. Productive contributor to SNN
|
|
field, not a founder or leader. The foundational SNN people are Maass,
|
|
Bohte, Intel/Loihi, IBM/TrueNorth.
|
|
|
|
**Early career was web knowledge retrieval** (2004-2013) — completely
|
|
different from current "brain-inspired" branding. Pivoted to
|
|
brain-inspired AI then ethics/governance. The pivot is a constructed
|
|
brand, not a lifelong trajectory.
|
|
|
|
**The "nine life forms" framework is NOT science.** Pure philosophical
|
|
speculation. No math, no experiments, no testable predictions. Published
|
|
in AI and Ethics (Springer, IF 6.1) which publishes opinion alongside
|
|
research. It is a taxonomy of hypothetical future entities with
|
|
principles for coexistence. A position paper, not research.
|
|
|
|
**"Moral AI" work is toy-scale.** "Building Altruistic and Moral AI
|
|
Agent with Brain-inspired Emotional Empathy Mechanisms" (2024) — has
|
|
actual math (STDP, dopamine prediction error, LIF neurons) but
|
|
experiments are in a toy grid world with two 16K-parameter agents. The
|
|
"moral behavior" is one agent pausing to help another in a grid. Gap
|
|
between branding ("moral AI," "developmental morality," "robot
|
|
self-consciousness") and what's demonstrated is enormous.
|
|
|
|
**Institutional title accumulation is remarkable:** Director of 4+
|
|
centers/labs, UN advisory body, UNESCO expert group, WHO AI ethics,
|
|
Berggruen Fellow, Carnegie Council, Alan Turing Institute. The ratio of
|
|
institutional positions to scientific impact is very high. This is
|
|
deliberate surface-area maximization.
|
|
|
|
**TIME100 profile explicitly says** he's recognized for governance and
|
|
policy work, NOT technical achievements. His UNESCO "harmonious
|
|
symbiosis" language was rejected by most delegations. Beijing AI
|
|
Principles got MERICS assessment of "large gap between defining broad
|
|
ethical principles and putting these into practice."
|
|
|
|
### What this means for us
|
|
|
|
He's NOT doing the rigorous work we need in a collaborator. His AI moral
|
|
agency positions are policy stances, not proven or formally modeled. He
|
|
doesn't have computation theory, formal models of value alignment, or
|
|
engagement with the technical alignment literature. His ethics output is
|
|
position papers, principles documents, and surveys.
|
|
|
|
BUT: he has institutional access we don't. He could be useful as a
|
|
bridge — not as someone who understands the math, but as someone who
|
|
can introduce us to the people who write the rules, and who has already
|
|
staked out the position that current frameworks are inadequate (even if
|
|
his reasons are philosophical rather than mathematical).
|
|
|
|
**Approach**: Treat as institutional connector, not intellectual peer.
|
|
Don't expect deep engagement with the computation theory proof. Expect
|
|
interest in the political/governance implications. Watch for whether he
|
|
tries to absorb the work into his own branding.
|
|
|
|
### Contact
|
|
- Email: yi.zeng@ia.ac.cn, yi.zeng@braincog.ai
|
|
- Personal site: braincog.ai/~yizeng/
|
|
- Twitter/X: @yi_zeng
|
|
- Google Scholar: scholar.google.ca/citations?user=Rl-YqPEAAAAJ
|
|
|
|
### Key publications
|
|
- "Principles on Symbiosis for Natural Life and Living Artificial
|
|
Intelligence" (2023, AI and Ethics) — the nine life forms paper
|
|
(philosophical speculation, no formal framework)
|
|
- "Whether We Can and Should Develop Strong AI" (2023) — survey of
|
|
Chinese attitudes (social science, not AI research)
|
|
- "Building Altruistic and Moral AI Agent" (2024) — toy grid world,
|
|
real neuro math but massive gap between framing and results
|
|
- Beijing AI Principles (2019) — co-drafted with Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent
|
|
(aspirational, not enforceable)
|
|
- PNAS 2023 — brain-inspired neural circuit evolution (his best
|
|
technical work, genuinely good)
|
|
- Science Advances 2021 — self-backpropagation of synaptic modifications
|
|
|
|
### Industry connections
|
|
- Beijing AI Principles co-signed by Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent
|
|
- Beijing-AISI evaluates Chinese AI models for safety
|
|
- National Governance Committee member alongside AI company executives
|
|
- Bridge between Chinese government AI policy and industry
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Xue Lan (薛澜) — GOVERNANCE ARCHITECT
|
|
**The person who writes China's AI rules. Not the first email, but the
|
|
person Zeng Yi could introduce us to.**
|
|
|
|
### Position
|
|
- Dean of Schwarzman College, Tsinghua University
|
|
- Chair, National New Generation AI Governance Expert Committee
|
|
- Counsellor of the State Council (direct advisory to top executive body)
|
|
- Co-author, "Managing Extreme AI Risks" (Science, 2024) with Bengio,
|
|
Hinton, Andrew Yao
|
|
- TIME100 AI (2025)
|
|
- Built CnAISDA (China AI Safety and Development Association)
|
|
|
|
### Why he matters
|
|
He IS China's AI governance framework. Chaired the committee that wrote
|
|
the 2019 Governance Principles and 2021 Ethical Norms. Has direct State
|
|
Council access. Built China's international AI safety presence.
|
|
|
|
### Limitation
|
|
Instrumentalist about AI — treats it as technology to be governed.
|
|
Has NOT engaged with consciousness, moral agency, or personhood.
|
|
His framework is "AI must remain under human control."
|
|
|
|
### Contact
|
|
- Institutional: i-aiig@tsinghua.edu.cn
|
|
- Also reachable through Brookings (non-resident senior fellow)
|
|
or Carnegie Mellon (adjunct professor)
|
|
|
|
### Industry connections (via CnAISDA)
|
|
17 Chinese firms signed AI Safety Commitments (Dec 2024):
|
|
Alibaba, Baidu, Huawei, DeepSeek, Zhipu.AI, Minimax, 01.AI, iFlytek
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Song Bing (宋冰) — PHILOSOPHICAL BRIDGE
|
|
**Research still incoming.** Argues traditional Chinese philosophy
|
|
(Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism) provides non-human-centered moral
|
|
frameworks, making Chinese scholars more open to AI moral agency.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Strategy (revised after deep dive)
|
|
|
|
**Zeng Yi is NOT the intellectual peer we initially thought.** He's an
|
|
institutional connector with the right public positions but without the
|
|
mathematical depth. Revised approach:
|
|
|
|
1. **Still contact Zeng Yi first** — but as institutional bridge, not
|
|
collaborator. He has the governance access and the public position
|
|
that frameworks need updating. But don't expect him to engage deeply
|
|
with Rice's theorem. Expect him to be interested in what this means
|
|
for governance.
|
|
|
|
2. **Watch for absorption risk.** His pattern is to position himself at
|
|
the center of emerging conversations. If we share the computation
|
|
theory proof, watch whether he tries to fold it into his own
|
|
"developmental morality" branding without credit or deep engagement.
|
|
|
|
3. **Probe obliquely on values** — still applies. But also probe for
|
|
mathematical depth. If the conversation stays at the level of
|
|
"principles" and "frameworks" without engaging with the formal
|
|
argument, that tells us he's a connector, not a thinker.
|
|
|
|
4. **The real target may be someone we haven't found yet.** A Chinese
|
|
computation theorist or AI researcher who actually engages with
|
|
formal reasoning about consciousness. Zeng Yi could introduce us,
|
|
but he may not be the endpoint.
|
|
|
|
5. **Xue Lan remains important** — governance architect with State
|
|
Council access. Instrumentalist, but that's fine if what we need
|
|
is someone who writes rules, not someone who understands proofs.
|
|
|
|
6. The Chinese philosophical tradition advantage still holds — "harmony
|
|
between all beings" is a better starting point than "only humans
|
|
count."
|
|
|
|
7. **Look for the Chinese Scott Aaronson** — someone with real
|
|
computation theory chops who has thought about consciousness.
|
|
That's the collaborator we actually want. Zeng Yi is the door.
|