we're starting with the news today that the brazil and west ham midfielder lucas paqueta has been charged with misconduct by the football association in relation to alleged betting rule breaches. the charges relate to four games over an 18 month period, where it's alleged paqueta deliberately tried to get a card from the referee in order to influence betting markets. the fa investigation was triggered by suspicious betting patterns. he has until the 3rd ofjune to provide a response, although he's already publicly denied any wrongdoing, on social media saying... "i will fight with every breath to clear my name." here's our senior football reporter simon stone. what they have said, as you say, in their statement is basically that he is intentionally seeking to receive a card for the purposes of effecting the betting markets in those games in order for one the betting markets in those games in orderfor one or more the betting markets in those games in order for one or more persons to

profit from betting on those matches. that is absolutely prohibited underfootball association regulations. meanwhile, west ham have officially appointed julen lopategui as their new manager. the former spain, real madrid and most recently wolves coach has been out of a job since leaving the premier league last year. he agreed a deal with west ham earlier this month and succeeds david moyes, who won the europa conference league with west ham last year. fresh from winning the t20 series, england's women cricketers have beaten pakistan by in their opening one day international in derby. batting first at the county ground, england lost a steady flow of wickets before alice capsey dug in to make 44, her best one day international score, as the home side finished on 243—9. sophie ecclestone was then pick of the england bolwers as she took 3—26, on the way to beating pakistan by 37 runs. and that's the sport.

lucy, thank you very much. you are watching the context. it is time for our regular weekly segment — ai decoded. welcome to ai decoded. if you were with us last week, and i must encourage you to look at our previous episodes on youtube, you will have heard us talk about the huge advances at open ai and the launch of chatgpt 40 — tonight we are going focus on the one issue that worries us all. who is in control? where is the balance between innovation and regulation? and it has been quite the week. on tuesday, the european union got serious, setting out the most comprehensive legislation on al anywhere in the world. tonight, we will hear from the woman who played a key role in developing the eu's ai bill, margrethe vestager, the european commissioner for competition. you know, this idea that you should not regulate technology because that develops really, really

fast but you should regulate the use of it. that idea is gaining a lot of traction. at the ai summit in soeul this week, 16 of the biggest ai developers signed an international agreement that builds on the commitments secured last year at bletchley park. the companies from china, america and the middle east have agreed not to develop or deploy ai models that cannot maintain risk below a certain threshold. eu legislation, a new international agreement — but where is the overlap with china and the united states, two of the biggest developers? and where do the big powers diverge? we will get the thoughts tonight of miles taylor, who is advising the us congress. with me in the studio, our regular ai contributor and author on technology, stephanie hare. hello. can we talk about the uk and the south korea summit? the british government setting out this new

agreement this week, rishi sunak said it's a world first to have so many leading ai companies all agreeing to the same commitments on al safety. how do you think this is ai safety. how do you think this is significant? it ai safety. how do you think this is significant?— ai safety. how do you think this is siunificant? , , , , significant? it depends, it depends because it is _ significant? it depends, it depends because it is better _ significant? it depends, it depends because it is better than _ significant? it depends, it depends because it is better than nothing i because it is better than nothing and it is better than where we had the first ai summit here in the united kingdom in november. that said, it is a question of enforcement. big companies love self—regulation because they cannot be sued if they don't maintain their commitments. who is watching the watchers? who is checking on they are due at what they are doing. they costeen like to say they cannot reveal training data or intellectual property so really what is happening here? it sounds great but it might just be a pinky promise. it here? it sounds great but it might just be a pinky promise.— just be a pinky promise. if the 16 companies _ just be a pinky promise. if the 16 companies are _ just be a pinky promise. if the 16 companies are the _ just be a pinky promise. if the 16 companies are the market - just be a pinky promise. if the 16 i companies are the market leaders, just be a pinky promise. if the 16 - companies are the market leaders, do their safety innovations control the market. do the smaller developments that use the technology on their

platforms, are they hemmed in by the protocols that are agreed this week? only and so much is it enforced. yes in terms of tone that would set the direction of travel but again, who is putting actual resources, manpower and money to checking all of this. we also very recently with open ai and american actress scarlettjohansson with her voice scarlett joha nsson with her voice being scarlettjohansson with her voice being used without her consent, who was checking that? why did she find out after the ai assistant had been revealed even though she said no and had to get a lawyer to come in and do a cease and desist and they have to find out what training was used. he was checking beforehand, no one. are among the 16 signatories are zhipu ai and technology from the united arab emirates, to see the trees are from two countries that are so far unwilling to put their pick—up leads to regulation. rishi

sunak said this is a result of the light touch the government has taken and the eu is taking a very different approach. all 27 countries endorsed the new ai legislation and it is much more comprehensive than the light touch voluntary approach that the uk and the us have taken. one of the key architects of that bill is the eu competition commissioner, commissionertheir commissioner, commissioner their stay. yesterday commissioner, commissionertheir stay. yesterday i went to see her in brussels. commissioner, the eu's new rules on artificial intelligence were endorsed by the 27 countries on tuesday. you say it's the global benchmark for al regulation. why do you think it will have an impact beyond the eu's borders? i think because the choice of regulating the use of technology and only having sort of a tight regulatory grip when it's something existential for the individual, that approach is something that we shared very early on with the americans within the trade and technology council, so they have the same approach. it's also the approach that we see with the canadians.

we're passing ai legislation, hopefully, as we speak. when i talk with colleagues from otherjurisdictions, you know, this idea that you should not regulate technology because that develops really, really fast, but you should regulate the use of it. that idea is gaining a lot of traction. what might surprise people is that this new legislation will not be fully in place until 2026. and we know that al is growing exponentially. aren't people bound to ask, what are you doing to address the risk today? and isn't there a danger that pandora's box is already open by the time this comes into play? oh, but the pandora's box is open right now. i don't think one should be fooled about that. so, for instance, we use our digital services legislation. the thing that is going to keep digital services safe for us, that they are not addictive, that they do not promote mental

health problems, that they cannot be used to undermine elections. here we also say to the companies providing these services, well, you need to be extra aware if you fuel this with artificial intelligence, you need to be extra aware about fake products, fake videos. now that we have an election coming up and we know about the abuse that is going on out there, you need to pay really close attention because due to this legislation, you already have obligations to protect people from fraud, from things that are illegal in member states. so, i think that's and then of course that we have the g7 code of conduct, we have a lot of commitment from businesses. but of course, commitment is a very different thing from having legislation that obliges you to be careful and put safety first in critical situations. can you regulate something that

people don't fully understand? i get the impression, even from the ai companies themselves, that this thing is providing breakthroughs, developments that they didn't expect themselves. but i think this is actually quite a modest ask, that, for instance, if you use al to decide, who would you call for a job interview, who can get a mortgage, what kind of treatment should patients have. well, you should have a pretty good idea that it's not about your postal code or your gender or your political views, that you get this treatment or you get the mortgage or you get the interview for the job. when you get into that situation, well, then you would need a human in the loop and you would ask for explainability as to why this outcome instead of the other one. there's been a lot written in the last week or so about the so called doomers of open ai, the people who wanted to go more slowly and wanted to see

how things operated, they've left the board. are you at all concerned that profit is being put before safety? well, i have been working with big tech for ten years and it's experience based that i have a concern that profit is put before other concerns. that could be safety, that can be mental health, that can be, you know, normal competition that even as a big player, that you can be challenged. so, knowing the sector, i think it's really important that the public, that the common good also have a very stern presence in these companies and are facing these companies with very specific asks in orderfor this to be safe for us to use. and of course, there are, sort of, the existential risks for humanity when it comes to ai.

they are in the future, but not in the too—far future. and i think you can better relate to those if you deal with the existential risks for the individual, because it is an existential risk if you can afford a mortgage, but you cannot have it, if you need treatment, but you're not given the right treatment because the algorithm doesn't know you're that you're a woman. and because of that, your symptoms are different than what they were for a man. so, i think if we are careful now when something is a stake for the individual, we will be much better at preventing things that can sort of undermine how humanity is working. two things about that interview that i would like you to clear up for me, first of all, this idea that you can regulate the technology even though you do not know what is coming, how can you regulate that even science

does not know where it's going? i think what you are going to do is that you're setting up the guard rails, if you will, for uses. let's take something like the fork that we all know and love we don't regulate folks but i could potentially use a fork to eat a salad or reach across the table and stab you with it. we regulate stabbing you we don't regulate stabbing you we don't regulate the fork. we want to leave all of the innovation routes open but what we want to do is that both you and i walk around knowing that i cannot harm you. that you and i walk around knowing that i cannot harm you.— cannot harm you. that brings me to my second — cannot harm you. that brings me to my second question, _ cannot harm you. that brings me to my second question, she _ cannot harm you. that brings me to my second question, she is - my second question, she is suggesting that there needs to be a symbiotic relationship between users and developers. who sits between these companies and bearing in mind there is legislation in europe now and we have done that pretty fast because we have debate been developing this is the pandemic, quicker than anybody else, who is saying you need to look at this law because it is relevant to us? probably in most companies it's going to be the chief legal counsel but you will see it in met some of

the most innovative ones they will have a chief ai officer. just like they will have a chief privacy officer. any company that is looking to really embed ai into their operations, i think we will see a trend emerging where they will have a board level person... the?c trend emerging where they will have a board level person...— a board level person... they will welcome this _ a board level person... they will welcome this because _ a board level person... they will welcome this because they - a board level person... they will welcome this because they will. a board level person... they will. welcome this because they will have something to to?— something to to? regulation makes thins ve something to to? regulation makes things very clear. — something to to? regulation makes things very clear, what _ something to to? regulation makes things very clear, what is _ something to to? regulation makes things very clear, what is expected l things very clear, what is expected in what is out of scope.— things very clear, what is expected in what is out of scope. where does that leave the _ in what is out of scope. where does that leave the united _ in what is out of scope. where does that leave the united states - that leave the united states companies that then? coming up after the break we will speak to miles taylor. he is a us national security expert. he previously worked in the trump administration, as chief of homeland security, he is now heavily focused on artificial intelligence, advising all parties in congress. we will see if there is any overlap. where do these regulatory frameworks diverge, and what does that mean for our safety?

welcome back.

stephanie hasjust stephanie has just been telling us how important it is for these ai officers to sit on boards and work to rules but... there are no comprehensive, federal laws that regulate ai in the united states. no federal obligation on developers, users, operators or deployers of ai systems. but late last year, president biden did sign an executive order that proposed legislation to address safety, responsible development, civil rights, privacy, all the pertinent areas. commissioner vestager, who we heard from in the first half of the programme, says there has been discussion between the eu and the us. but how much, and how aligned are they on the regulation that is coming? let's bring in miles taylor, former chief of staff at the us department of homeland security, now a tech and security expert who has advised lawmakers on al. give us the broad picture, where do you think you are in the united states in respect of legislation and regulation? i states in respect of legislation and reuulation? ., , ~ states in respect of legislation and reuulation? ~ ., regulation? i actually think that the united _ regulation? i actually think that the united states _ regulation? i actually think that the united states and _ regulation? i actually think that the united states and europe . regulation? i actually think that l the united states and europe are still quite far apart on this subject. i am going to give you an

example, right now i am in dallas, texas, at capitol factory�*s health supernova this is a big head ai area and other officials are talking about the abrogation of ai and other officials are talking about the abrogation of al to health care. there are folks from european companies who are used to the conversation about this technology being more heavily regulated and having conversations today making the case that that regulation is important for protecting life and safety but you have a lot of american entrepreneurs here who are talking to government officials and saying to the contrary, they feel like overly regulating ai in their view will keep them from moving forward with life—saving breakthroughs that could impact health care. very different perceptions. how does that impact the red legislative discussion? you see it right now in congress. the us congress has been very slow to do any global broad regulation on artificial intelligence and instead senators have only recently released

a framework for how to regulate ai and a framework which is very decentralised when compared to the european union. a framework which allows individual regulators that already oversee different sectors in society to regulate ai rather than doing it as a federal government. big, big differences remained bad, however, that i do think there will be alignment here with the eu and the us with the most sophisticated ai models, those that some might claim might become sentience in the coming years. claim might become sentience in the coming years— coming years. miles, i'm very cufious coming years. miles, i'm very curious to _ coming years. miles, i'm very curious to hear _ coming years. miles, i'm very curious to hear about - coming years. miles, i'm veryj curious to hear about whether coming years. miles, i'm very - curious to hear about whether you think_ curious to hear about whether you think states are going to take a different— think states are going to take a different approach as opposed to the federal_ different approach as opposed to the federal level because states can often _ federal level because states can often move faster as compared to the us government? it�*s often move faster as compared to the us government?— us government? it's a great question and in fact we're — us government? it's a great question and in fact we're already _ us government? it's a great question and in fact we're already seeing - and in fact we're already seeing that. even though the federal government is moving slowly, a number of states are moving very quickly with big ai regulatory

schemes. in fact, quickly with big ai regulatory schemes. infact, right quickly with big ai regulatory schemes. in fact, right now, there is a lot of controversy in the united states about what is happening in california. there is legislation proposed in california which would create a very broad regulatory regime for artificial intelligence, one that some of the bigger companies might be comfortable with but you are seeing smaller companies, what we call little tech, come forward and say they are very concerned about california's regulations because they might not be able to comply with them. they do not have the man hours, the time, the staff, to be able to comply with the very detailed descriptions, prescriptive bills that come out. the last note there would be when you have 50 states and all 50 of them have slightly different requirements, it gets incredibly complicated. as that starts to happen, you will see calls from text companies for the federal government to step in a bigger way to try and override those laws so they don't have to deal with the conflicting patchwork of ai regulation. conflicting patchwork of ai regulation-— conflicting patchwork of ai reuulation. . . ., ~ , ., regulation. patchwork is the word because i regulation. patchwork is the word because i was _ regulation. patchwork is the word because i was just _ regulation. patchwork is the word because i was just going - regulation. patchwork is the word because i wasjust going to - regulation. patchwork is the word because i wasjust going to say i because i was just going to say we're talking about agreement in a

bigger way to try and override those laws so they don't have to deal with the conflicting patchwork of ai regulation. patchwork is the word because i was just going to say we're talking about agreement insole, career, in the eu, state—by—state as you just explain, it is very fragmented and we have sat on a panel before, miles, where someone has talked about and i a e a style agreement among all countries where we have an international agreement that brings together all its regulation and has someone sits on the board and regulates around the world, why are we not going in that direction? i the world, why are we not going in that direction?— that direction? i think that right now it's because _ that direction? i think that right now it's because we _ that direction? i think that right now it's because we are - that direction? i think that right now it's because we are still - that direction? i think that right now it's because we are still in l that direction? i think that right i now it's because we are still in the wild west of understanding what this technology will and will not do and in the meantime, builders are moving forward with a building. just a floor below me where a lot of the start—up founders and meeting and talking about their ai technology i suspect that most of them have no idea what is happening in the red glittery conversations in the us or the eu, they arejust head down building products. the problem is going to come when some of those founders try to introduce some of those products in their marketplace

to benefit people, they may both sell in one place but not another and get faced with this regulation and get faced with this regulation and that regulation as these products come to market those builders, those investors they will start to feel the friction. we builders, those investors they will start to feel the friction.— start to feel the friction. we are startin: start to feel the friction. we are starting to _ start to feel the friction. we are starting to see _ start to feel the friction. we are starting to see that _ start to feel the friction. we are starting to see that in _ start to feel the friction. we are starting to see that in social - start to feel the friction. we are i starting to see that in social media with apple and google who are running into regulations here in the eu. i running into regulations here in the eu. , , , running into regulations here in the eu. ,, , , ., ., running into regulations here in the eu. ,, , , e, e, , , eu. i guess my question for miles is to what extent _ eu. i guess my question for miles is to what extent is _ eu. i guess my question for miles is to what extent is the _ eu. i guess my question for miles is to what extent is the us _ eu. i guess my question for miles is to what extent is the us reluctant i to what extent is the us reluctant to what extent is the us reluctant to regulate ai because they are worried — to regulate ai because they are worried about china really taking the lead? — worried about china really taking the lead? it worried about china really taking the lead? ., , , worried about china really taking the lead? . , , the lead? it has been the most important _ the lead? it has been the most important part _ the lead? it has been the most important part of— the lead? it has been the most important part of the _ the lead? it has been the most. important part of the conversation behind the scenes. whether it is a democrat or republican member of congress, right now, the fear that the united states might fall behind china is what is keeping legislators who normally favour regulation away from grabbing the regulatory lever. they are concerned that the united states puts a complicated regulatory architecture in place then beijing will speed ahead of washington when it comes to this topic of innovation for has been in very dominant part

of their conversation behind the scenes and i would suspect that those fears keep china and the united states from doing anything too dramatic when it comes to ai rules. ., ,. ., too dramatic when it comes to ai rules. . ,. . , too dramatic when it comes to ai rules. . ,. ., , _, rules. fascinating. keep your comments— rules. fascinating. keep your comments coming _ rules. fascinating. keep your comments coming on - rules. fascinating. keep your comments coming on some l rules. fascinating. keep your| comments coming on some of rules. fascinating. keep your- comments coming on some of the things we are disgusting. i'm going to lighten the mood a little bit. do you like pink floyd, miles? i love flo d. anyone who knows their music, will know that its 50 years ago this march, that pink floyd released dark side of the moon. further evidence that all good things were born in 1973. and to mark that anniversary, the band has invited a new generation of animators to create music videos for any of the album's 10 songs. one of those who responded to that challenge is the finnish musician and ai creator nuutti karaja who has been combining the music, with some of the most dystopian ideas we are facing. take a look at this. it is set to shine on you crazy diamond.

shine on you crazy diamond plays it's quite psychedelic, isn't it? i sat and watched this earlier and it's quite trippy. it is fantastic. let's speak to nuutti kataja. it has i it hasi million it has 1 million views on youtube so that tells you how good it is. how much is that you and how much is the ai vision of what our future looks like? i

ai vision of what our future looks like? , ., , , ai vision of what our future looks like? , , ., ai vision of what our future looks like? , ., , , ., ~ like? i usually try to take the ai let them take _ like? i usually try to take the ai let them take the _ like? i usually try to take the ai let them take the lead. - like? i usually try to take the ai let them take the lead. i - like? i usually try to take the ai let them take the lead. i start l let them take the lead. i start prompting very simply first and that song, shine on you crazy diamond, my idea was first because it's a song about syd barrett and his mental issues. ifigured out i about syd barrett and his mental issues. i figured out i wanted to get a big diamond in a gallery setting and i start moulding with a very simple prompts, one word, a couple of words and then start adding up with those. i start printing things that i like and then feeding them back to the machine. what really strikes me about this is that for you as a musician first and foremost, if you had tried to make something like this to promote one of your songs it would have cost you are fortune. but this looks fantastic. does it hah does it open up fantastic. does it hah does it open up a whole new word for you? it’s

up a whole new word for you? it's amazin: , up a whole new word for you? it�*s amazing, this new technology. i've always wanted to make videos for my own music so this is great. i think the visual thing with the music, it's like, i can see what i want to, first of all, i hear something and then i see something and that's it. it's kind of like chimes together perfectly. i it's kind of like chimes together erfectl . ., �* it's kind of like chimes together erfectl. ., �* ~ ., it's kind of like chimes together erfectl. ~ ., perfectly. i don't know if you can see it, perfectly. i don't know if you can see it. miles. — perfectly. i don't know if you can see it, miles, i— perfectly. i don't know if you can see it, miles, iwas _ perfectly. i don't know if you can see it, miles, iwas interesting l see it, miles, i was interesting what you are saying earlier on in the programme, stephanie mentioned scarlettjohansson sued open ai because a voice appeared that's a little bit like hers and she says that she did not want them using it. and on the flip side you have pink floyd who are very happy to use their music to encourage this kind of creativity and i just wonder in the realm of what were just talking about in terms of regulation, will accommodate things? it about in terms of regulation, will accommodate things?— about in terms of regulation, will accommodate things? it does. the intellectual property _ accommodate things? it does. the intellectual property component i accommodate things? it does. the intellectual property component ofj intellectual property component of this is— intellectual property component of this is what is going to cause a lot

of these _ this is what is going to cause a lot of these different issues to come to the fore _ of these different issues to come to the fore. intellectual property is a legal— the fore. intellectual property is a legal challenge which is as old as legal— legal challenge which is as old as legal challenges themselves. they are as _ legal challenges themselves. they are as old — legal challenges themselves. they are as old as the law itself. people claim _ are as old as the law itself. people claim someone else told their work so von're _ claim someone else told their work so you're going to see that happen a lot when_ so you're going to see that happen a lot when these models are used for creative _ lot when these models are used for creative purposes. but i will say this is— creative purposes. but i will say this is a — creative purposes. but i will say this is a very impressive product and there — this is a very impressive product and there was another one just another— and there was another one just another week, the band washed out came _ another week, the band washed out came out— another week, the band washed out came out with the song and they used an open— came out with the song and they used an open al _ came out with the song and they used an open alto make aai powered music video and _ an open alto make aai powered music video and i_ an open alto make aai powered music video and i will have to confess, it was quite — video and i will have to confess, it was quite remarkable and affecting. ithink— was quite remarkable and affecting. i think you _ was quite remarkable and affecting. i think you will see people feel uneasy— i think you will see people feel uneasy but pretty excited about this moment _ uneasy but pretty excited about this moment i— uneasy but pretty excited about this moment. ., �* ~' uneasy but pretty excited about this moment. ., �* ~ ., ., moment. i don't think i want to live in this dystopian _ moment. i don't think i want to live in this dystopian world! _ moment. i don't think i want to live in this dystopian world! there's - in this dystopian world! there's some pretty scary stuff in there but it is a fantastic piece. we are up against the break, we're out of time, thank you stephanie and thank you myles and thank you nuutti. thank you for watching.

hello. for some of us, the rain over the last couple of days has felt relentless. we've seen more than 100 millimetres of rain falling in some locations in the space of 48 hours. this weather system swirled its way in from the near continent and then just sat in place, and so the rainjust kept on coming. and this area of low pressure is still going to be with us through tonight and into tomorrow, but it will be weakening. it will be loosening its grip, so the rain will continue to ease off. some heavier bursts of rain for a time across the northern isles. still quite wet for a while across central and southern parts of scotland. could see some further flooding issues here. broadly speaking, though,

the rain continuing to peter out through the night. and where we see some clear skies, particularly down towards the south of england, it will actually be a little on the chilly side, maybe down to five, six or seven degrees. but that's where we'll start tomorrow morning with some spells of sunshine. further north, a good part of wales, the midlands, certainly northern england, northern ireland and scotland seeing a lot of cloud. that cloud still producing some bits and pieces of rain and drizzle, but it certainly isn't going to be as wet as it has been over recent days. in the sunniest spots down towards the south—east of england, temperatures will get to 19—20 degrees. and actually it does look relatively warm for this coming weekend. there will be some spells of sunshine, but also some heavy and possibly thundery showers. now, most places will actually see some dry weather on saturday. this little weather feature here trying to nose its way in from the continent. that may bring some showery rain for a timejust clipping into eastern counties of england. also a frontal system bringing cloud and rain into south—west england,

the south—west of wales, parts of northern ireland by the end of the day. but in between, there should be a slice of sunshine and just one or two showers. and where we have that sunshine, temperatures peaking at 20—21 degrees. now, as we head into sunday, there'll still be some sunny spells around, but also some pretty hefty showers. they'll be quite hit and miss. some places may avoid the showers and stay dry, others will get a real drenching with some thunder and lightning mixing in. in the sunniest spots, though, temperatures again into the high teens, maybe up to around 20 degrees celsius. perhaps a little bit less warm on monday. still some spells of sunshine, but also some hefty showers, especially in the north of the uk.

hello, i'm christian fraser. you're watching the context on bbc news. that's why we need rwanda. we've got to make it crystal clear to everybody. if you come to our country illegally, you won't get to stay. we will be able to remove you to a safe alternative because that's how you break the cycle. you now have the power, the chance to end the chaos, to turn the page and to rebuild britain. for those not persuaded of independence. - i look forward over the next six- weeks to listening to your concerns,

making the case, hopefully persuading, but, if not, - then engaging in i respectful dialogue. in terms of the big picture today, what we've had from the party leaders fanning out across the uk is setting out their broad campaign messages. and you know what? we'll hear them repeatedly. first, the latest bbc news... uk party leaders have begun six weeks of campaigning before the election on the 11th ofjuly. rishi sunak has told supporters that economic stability has returned under the conservatives. but the labour leader, sir keir starmer, told a rally it was time to "end the chaos" of the conservative government. the post office offences bill has been passed by parliament. it means that sub—postmasters will have their convictions quashed tomorrow after the bill gets royal assent from the king. the legislation does not, however, cover scotland, which has a separate legal system.