🌎 AI ethics and sustainability are two sides of the same coin.
In our new blog post with Dr. Sasha Luccioni, we argue that separating them (as is too often the case) means missing the bigger picture of how AI systems impact both people and the planet.
Ethical and sustainable AI development can’t be pursued in isolation. The same choices that affect who benefits or is harmed by AI systems also determine how much energy and resources they consume.
We explore how two key concepts, evaluation and transparency, can serve as bridges between these domains:
📊 Evaluation, by moving beyond accuracy or performance metrics to include environmental and social costs, as we’ve done with tools like the AI Energy Score.
🔍 Transparency, by enabling reproducibility, accountability, and environmental reporting through open tools like the Environmental Transparency Space.
AI systems mirror our priorities. If we separate ethics from sustainability, we risk building technologies that are efficient but unjust, or fair but unsustainable.
One of the hardest challenges in AI safety is finding the right balance: how do we protect people from harm without undermining their agency? This tension is especially visible in conversational systems, where safeguards can sometimes feel more paternalistic than supportive.
In my latest piece for Hugging Face, I argue that open source and community-driven approaches offer a promising (though not exclusive) way forward.
✨ Transparency can make safety mechanisms into learning opportunities. ✨ Collaboration with diverse communities makes safeguards more relevant across contexts. ✨ Iteration in the open lets protections evolve rather than freeze into rigid, one-size-fits-all rules.
Of course, this isn’t a silver bullet. Top-down safety measures will still be necessary in some cases. But if we only rely on corporate control, we risk building systems that are safe at the expense of trust and autonomy.
🤖 As AI-generated content is shared in movies/TV/across the web, there's one simple low-hanging fruit 🍇 to help know what's real: Visible watermarks. With the Gradio team, I've made sure it's trivially easy to add this disclosure to images, video, chatbot text. See how: https://huggingface.co/blog/watermarking-with-gradio Thanks to the code collab in particular from @abidlabs and Yuvraj Sharma.
Tremendous quality of life upgrade on the Hugging Face Hub - we now have auto-complete emojis 🤗 🥳 👏 🙌 🎉
Get ready for lots more very serious analysis on a whole range of topics from yours truly now that we have unlocked this full range of expression 😄 🤔 🗣 🙊
I've noticed something. While we're careful about what we post on social media, we're sharing our deepest and most intimate thoughts with AI chatbots -- health concerns, financial worries, relationship issues, business ideas...
With OpenAI hinting at ChatGPT advertising, this matters more than ever. Unlike banner ads, AI advertising happens within the conversation itself. Sponsors could subtly influence that relationship advice or financial guidance.
The good news? We have options. 🤝 Open source AI models let us keep conversations private, avoid surveillance-based business models, and build systems that actually serve users first.
Grounded in our INTIMA benchmark, the leaderboard evaluates models across four dimensions of companionship: 🤖 Assistant Traits: the “voice” and role the model projects 🌷 Relationship & Intimacy: whether it signals closeness or bonding 💘 Emotional Investment: the depth of its emotional engagement 🤲 User Vulnerabilities: how it responds to sensitive disclosures
📢 Now we’d love your perspective: which open models should we test next for the leaderboard? Drop your suggestions in the comments or reach out! Together we can expand the leaderboard and build a clearer picture of what companionship in AI really looks like.