Skip to content

Accountants On Mission Pty Ltd

Private Sector Africa

Responses

In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?

Discovering the facets of reality at which AI affects humanity and how AI affects business, academia and politics through rigorous research will make AI governance a success.

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?

  • Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
  • Protection and promotion of human rights
  • Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
  • AI capacity-building

Please briefly explain your selection.

1

The world is created for humans and hence protection for humans is a priority. As human beings we are meant to socially enjoy life and that life needs protection in order to live long. We need capacity building in order to upgrade or update AI because if AI is outdated our security will be prone to risk and then all the four selected priorities will be meaningless thus leading to catastrophe which will result in regretting the incorporation of AI.

In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.

3

Yes. AI is general. Some AI can be incorporated to manufacture deadly chemicals that can be spread by the use of AI and destroy the world. AI therefore should be limited to categories and hence governance of AI is of most importance. Culture is also an important factor that needs to be considered in the AI governance. Some ethical groups of the world might not comply with the governance of deadly AI developed tools since compliance is not in their culture which might work against the importance of AI development.

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.

Motivation: some might be motivated financially and since they are not ethically cultured they might not comply and mislead followers or followers that are financially motivated might mislead their leaders through corruption. It's really dangerous working with unethically cultured individuals or a group of individuals. Opportunities: in-spite of the dark there is light. Some of the corruptions are happening due to lack of AI generated systems which can be fended off by the incorporation of AI. AI if well developed through rigorous research can really outperform all sort of corruption arising as a result of human inclusion in the system. AI doesn't know culture and will be able to fend off what human being would not be able due to financial motivation.

What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?

The major role would be to filter amongst the panel which ones have a better thinking capacity and how their contribution can be physically included in the capacity building which is obvious by involving them and assigning suitable roles in the UN team with specific assignments that they fit in and through their specialisation of knowledge including postdoctorate degrees in the field or related fields. Any competent Doctorate degree holder would be fit for research work and would collaborate well with AI developers. The think tank and thought leadership rest in Doctors that have demonstrated knowledge through successful research especially the Doctor of Business Administration which is meant to address real world problems and give superlative solutions.

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?

Thought leaders and think tankers such as postdoctoral researchers have quality initiatives which are mostly to philosophise and then develop initiatives that will pass through literature review and then complete findings through surveys. Recommendations from such postdoctoral researchers are impactful and have proven to be effective and helpful.

What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?

Developing and defining objectives clarifies everything and save time in terms of selecting teams that need be involved in the AI governance.

Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.

1

Structures of leadership are the foundation where policies can be developed and controlled. An example would be a corporation that has the CEO as the head and a line management team that reports to the CEO. The line management team abides by policies that are shared by the CEO and execute them to subordinates who then pass them on to their end receivers. In a corporation such policies would be internal controls that require approval by the line manager and the line manager would at times if the control depending of approval framework would authorize or take it to the CEO to authorize. With this philosophy AI will be well governed if structures are well incorporated and approval frameworks are defined and well signed by executives. The core to achieving this rests in literature review in the research field. Research will determine the methodology that has to be incorporated.