Defense Innovation Research Institute of Hungary
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
- If most participants were informed about the possibility of an intelligence explosion (automated AI R&D significantly speeding up the rate of AI capability improvement). - If clear red-lines were established that frontier AI developers cannot cross. - If consensus started to be built around what we are really aiming towards - superintelligence? human augmentation?
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?
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
- Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
- Protection and promotion of human rights
Please briefly explain your selection.
2
AI holds serious promise (biotechnology, clean energy, etc), but also perilous risks (including human extinction) that have to be carefully weighed. Economic and geopolitical pressures make slowing down and careful development harder, so we have to coordinate!
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
2
Automated AI R&D is a sort of meta-risk, enhancing nearly all other risks, potentially leaving regulators unable to respond! The same is true if development is taking place in a competitive environment, as it does now - frontier labs are racing towards superintelligence (backed by significant investments), and governments are starting to realize the transformative potential of this technology.
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.
Even the whole EU cannot directly compete with US hyperscalers, so we risk giving up sovereignty, not to mention becoming collateral damage of a race between superpowers. Some kind of middle power coalition could be a solution, as well as pursuing alternative hardware and architecture approaches, but these also carry their own risks.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Establish clear red-lines and goals for development. Look ahead into the future! Maybe establish a worldwide AI Safety Institute?
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?
UK AI Security Institute, G7 presidency by France, in collaboration with CeSIA A Blueprint for Multinational Advanced AI Development, Europe and the Geopolitics of AGI, How Middle Powers May Prevent the Development of Artificial Superintelligence
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
Global South, where (cognitive) workers could be disproportionally displaced without a straightforward way of sharing the tax benefits of AI labs.
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Have a civilized debate about the alignment problem.
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
A Blueprint for Multinational Advanced AI Development, Europe and the Geopolitics of AGI, How Middle Powers May Prevent the Development of Artificial Superintelligence, Middle Powers Must Win the AI Deployment Race, nearly all RAND analysis on the subject