Singularity University
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Actionable recommendations with supporting data fed into an LLM system that would allow a range of stakeholders to customize recommendations for their own ecosystems.
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
Please briefly explain your selection.
1
Guardrails that simultaneously protect human capabilities and encourage innovation.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
Foresight practices spanning the broad range of transformative exponential technologies
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.
The greatest opportunity is to design systems to encourage widely-distributed abundance. The greatest challenge is that we already have abundance: It's just not evenly distributed. And global power in the AI arena today is deeply concentrated in a few hands. -gB
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
A broad and inclusive platform to source, incorporate, synthesize, and distribute the ongoing needs and priorities of constituents around the globe.
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?
One of the greatest needs is to connect the many human-centric AI-related initiatives around the world, and to help increase connectivity between stakeholders, reduce duplication, and to encourage outcome-focused initiatives with data to illustrate effectiveness.
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
- A playbook of design charrettes that any group of stakeholders can follow
- a coordination function to aggregate perspectives and synthesize inputs
- and a publishing function to distribute insights on an ongoing basis (again, rooted in a bias toward encouraging outcomes).
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
- We have only to look to the training datasets of today's genAI tools — information created by stakeholders who are relentlessly northern hemisphere
- western hemisphere
- male
- and white. Virtually every other constituency is under-represented.
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Consider something like "Global AI Dialogue Day," a 24-hour moving window of design charrettes, webinars, and in-person events rotating around the globe. For inspiration, look at our globalskillsday.com
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
1
Check out the work of glia.net and the Vendor Relationship Management standards. Any initiatives that place data ownership and governance in the hands of individuals can serve as bedrock foundations for broadly-beneficial genAI tools.