Computing Machinery and Intelligence
Turing replaced “can machines think?” with a test of behaviour. The board version of his question is still open: when a system behaves convincingly, what have we actually learnt about whether to trust it?
Ten documents on artificial intelligence that every board director should know. The test for inclusion is simple: would a director be worse at the job for not having read it? For each, there is a suggestion of where to start, because few boards have time to read them all in full.
These are foundations, not authorities to agree with. Their disagreements are part of their value.
Turing replaced “can machines think?” with a test of behaviour. The board version of his question is still open: when a system behaves convincingly, what have we actually learnt about whether to trust it?
The one technical paper on the list. It introduced the Transformer, the architecture behind today’s large language models. A board needs to know that it exists and why it mattered, not how it works.
Explains how a few very large models came to sit underneath many different products. The best starting point on concentration and dependency: if one model fails or changes, everything built on it is affected.
The essential sceptic. Fluent language is not the same as understanding, and people readily attribute meaning to machine output. A useful corrective for any board being shown an impressive demonstration.
Argues that AI’s effects will arrive through institutions, adoption and diffusion, like earlier general-purpose technologies, rather than as a sudden break. Closest to how a board should actually think about it.
It opens with a choice between building “a new Tower of Babel” and building a shared city. Readers need not share its theology to take its central point: progress needs an account of the people it is meant to serve, and of who holds the power it creates.
A practical structure (govern, map, measure, manage) that turns principles into decisions. Useful as a checklist of what a board should expect management to be able to show.
Where regulators have drawn the lines. Even for firms outside the EU, it is becoming the reference point for what counts as high-risk use.
The financial-services view: third-party dependency and concentration, correlated behaviour, cyber risk and model risk. For a financial services board, the most directly relevant document on this list.
The broadest evidence-based assessment of what general-purpose AI can now do and where the risks lie. It names a dilemma boards share: needing to act before the evidence is complete.
Worth knowing about, but background, specialist or covered by the ten above.