The Summit's effort to quickly raise the safety issues of rapid AI progress to an international level (outside the United Nation's Efforts) appears regressive because it is trying to bootstrap a coalition versus relying on pre-existing, extra-national institutions.
Why not work through an established, international venue that includes all nations and thus all political representations on earth?
A UN Security Council Resolution to treat increasingly powerful artificial intelligence structures as a threat to all humans, and thus all represented nations, would be the most direct and comprehensive way to effect a ban. As an institution formed to address the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all nations, the UN is pre-aligned with saving humanity from AI. Perhaps this is a parallel route that can be pursued.
The historical precedent most closely relating to this moment in time is likely the development of nuclear power, and the development of the International Atomic Energy Agency to regulate, hold inspections to verify, etc. Granted, the IAEA has not been very successful at least since the early 1990s, but fixing and aligning those processes/regimes that could otherwise lead to human extinction-- including both nuclear power and artificial intelligence, have precedence in institutions that could be revived. This is better than trying to bootstrap AI safety with a handful of countries at a Summit event-- even if China is there. North Korea, Russia, and others are not in the room.
The Summit's effort to quickly raise the safety issues of rapid AI progress to an international level (outside the United Nation's Efforts) appears regressive because it is trying to bootstrap a coalition versus relying on pre-existing, extra-national institutions.
Why not work through an established, international venue that includes all nations and thus all political representations on earth?
A UN Security Council Resolution to treat increasingly powerful artificial intelligence structures as a threat to all humans, and thus all represented nations, would be the most direct and comprehensive way to effect a ban. As an institution formed to address the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all nations, the UN is pre-aligned with saving humanity from AI. Perhaps this is a parallel route that can be pursued.
The historical precedent most closely relating to this moment in time is likely the development of nuclear power, and the development of the International Atomic Energy Agency to regulate, hold inspections to verify, etc. Granted, the IAEA has not been very successful at least since the early 1990s, but fixing and aligning those processes/regimes that could otherwise lead to human extinction-- including both nuclear power and artificial intelligence, have precedence in institutions that could be revived. This is better than trying to bootstrap AI safety with a handful of countries at a Summit event-- even if China is there. North Korea, Russia, and others are not in the room.