Below are excerpts from the interview, edited for length and clarity.
___
AP: Some national governments and multinational groups are talking about or starting to take action to put up guardrails for artificial intelligence. What can the United Nations deliver that others cannot?
Jill: I want to say three words. Inclusiveness – bringing more countries together than some very important existing measures. The second is legitimacy, because the United Nations has been documented helping countries and other actors manage the impacts of different types of technology, whether it’s biological, chemical, nuclear, space science – not only preventing misuse, but also promoting inclusive use, peaceful use of these Technology benefits everyone.
The third is authority. When the United Nations publishes something, it can have an authoritative impact. Certain UN instruments – such as human rights treaties – can be linked to some of these commitments. If AI capabilities (for example) lead to the exclusion of a certain community or violate the rights of certain people, then governments have an obligation under treaties signed at the United Nations to prevent this from happening. So it’s not just a moral authority. It creates a compliance pressure to fulfill any commitments you may have signed.
AP: At the same time, does the U.N. face challenges that aren’t faced by some of the other entities actively involved in this — or not to the same extent?
Gill: When you have a tent this big, you have to have a good process, which is not just about getting everyone to tick a box, but having meaningful, substantive discussions and getting some good results results. A related challenge is to meaningfully engage the private sector, civil society and the technology community. So that’s why the Secretary-General’s Artificial Intelligence Governance Advisory Body is very consciously constituted as a multi-stakeholder body.
A third limitation is that UN processes can be lengthy because building consensus among a large number of actors can take time and technology develops rapidly. Therefore, we need to be more agile.
AP: Can any level of government truly embrace artificial intelligence?
Jill: Of course. I think governments should do this, and they can influence the direction of artificial intelligence in many ways. This is not only about regulating abuse and harm, ensuring that democracy is not undermined and the rule of law is not undermined, but also about promoting a diverse and inclusive innovation ecosystem, thereby reducing the concentration of economic power and increasing the supply of opportunities.
AP: Speaking of equal opportunity, some in countries in the Global South hope artificial intelligence can bridge the digital divide, but others worry some countries could benefit from the technology while others are left behind. Do you think it’s possible for everyone to agree?
Jill: This is a very, very important question and I feel the same way. To me, this is a reason for everyone to come together in a more subtle way: to transcend the dichotomy of “promise versus danger” that often arises among those who have agency and the ability to do so In the minds of people – a more nuanced understanding is that in addition to “promise and danger”, access to opportunity and the empowering dimension of opportunity are also front and center.
So, yes, there is opportunity, there is excitement. But how to seize opportunities is a very, very important question.
AP: There’s a lot of discussion about bringing together conversations around the world about the regulation of artificial intelligence. What do you think this means? How to achieve?
Answer: Reaching a consensus and understanding of risks will be a very important result. It would be extremely valuable to have a shared understanding of which governance tools are or are likely to be effective, and which ones may require research and development. A consensus on what agile, decentralized models are needed for AI governance—to minimize risk and maximize opportunity—will be very, very valuable. Finally, a consensus on the political decisions we need to take next year at a future summit (the UN meeting planned for September 2024) so that our efforts in these functions are sustainable and understood by the public and Public recognition. believe.
AP: Speaking of artificial intelligence, what keeps you up at night? When you wake up in the morning, what makes you hopeful?
Jill: Let me start on the hopeful side. What really excites me is the potential of using artificial intelligence to accelerate progress towards the sustainable development goals, especially in priority areas such as health, agriculture, food security, education and the green transition. What worries me is that we’ve allowed it to develop in such a way that, first, we become confused about what artificial intelligence is capable of; Second, it leads to greater concentration of technological and economic power in the hands of a few people. These may be well-intentioned individuals and companies, but democracy thrives on diversity, competition and openness.
Therefore, I hope that we take the right direction and that artificial intelligence does not become a means to subvert democracy, deceive the entire society, and reduce our humanity. These are my concerns, but overall I’m very optimistic about artificial intelligence.
Svlook
