Masaryk University
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Clear and purposeful recommendations that resonates with people on the Global North as well as Global South.
From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?
- Protection and promotion of human rights
- Open-source software, open data and open AI models
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
Please briefly explain your selection.
2
As AI proliferates, organizations and governments develop (and gradually align) their governance approaches, just as they build up their AI capacities. Unfortunately, human oversight will gradually diminish, as individuals and companies prefer delegating and automation. Hence, we need to build safe, secure and trustworthy systems, which remains extremely difficult in AI as a non-deterministic system. We need to strengthen the promotion of human rights in relation to AI, as its applications will try to subvert them (with many global and regional players). Access to the tools need to be of utmost importance.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
2
Yes, the focus on the teenagers and young people, who grow up with AI systems, blindly trusting them, until they learn by bad mistakes what these systems are and how they operate. However, I am increasingly concerned that their fact-checking capabilities will be challenged by lack of expertise, lack of resources, and lack of time. Job security of the young generation and early career graduaates is another very pressing issue in my opinion not covered by capacity-building, nor socio-economic topics properly.
How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.
They are not. We just start to think about them, but the general public is concerned, try to learn the tools, uncritically. A special gap in East and Central Europe is the gap between governance and the general public - which means that even if the public is concerned, often their concerns are not translated in governance policies.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Give voice to the puplic, to vulnerable individuals, to the youth. Give them space, a platform, and also an opportunity to talk about the AI-related concrete issues and cases publicly. The AI Dialogue platform should then return to these topics regularly, and highlight improvement (or the lack of it).
What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?
All the international recommendations (OECD, UNESCO, etc.), as well as domain-specific initiatives (arts, research, etc.). It would be great to connect those, who are not at the forefront of AI (like researchers publishing at NeuroIPS or working for the AI frontier companies). I believe we should focus on those left behind, neglected or those without the capacities to jump on the AI bandwagon, due to external challenges. If those will be fine, we all will be fine. Unfortunately, I see a growing skills and technical abilities gaps, and they will not narrow in the future, rather the opposite.
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
Researchers with analyses (although their abilities are limited, as AI is such a new and non-deterministic technology). Citizens should tell stories and narratives, how they experience AI in their everyday lives. The young professionals should disclose how difficult is to land a job these days. They can have all the skills, but still fail to do so.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
Communities around booming AI infrastructure (datacentre buildings) but in fragile climate environments, where running and cooling these datacenters will be increasingly costly. As mentioned earlier, teenagers and university graduates. We need to hear their stories more, they will be using AI in their whole lifetime. What do they dream about AI would able to do, and what will they do if AI will not be available?
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
I wish a large COP26-like meeting could be organized with many many delegates and stakeholders across the AI ecosystem. They should arrive from the whole world, in particular Global South, Central and Eastern Europe, developing countries or those countries left behind in the AI-race - to give the airtime and publicity to their stories. To hear stories how they use creatively AI with lack of funding, lack of access, lack of basic infrastructure. I believe we can learn from them a lot. Only a priviledged few have the opportunity to listen to other stories from other continents.
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
1
We are 1 day after the EU's Digital Omnibus attempt - I do not see any concrete and effective AI governance at the moment. Emphasis is on the effective.