AI and Digital Predictions for 2024 report

Arguments

Urgent need to regulate or prohibit AI in the military domain.

Supporting facts:

• Discussions far from consensus.

• The technological developments are faster than the institutional or multilateral response.

• Different international communities hold varied views on regulation.

---

The concept of meaningful human control over AI still needs to be decided

---

The bias in AI target acquisition needs to be considered

---

The regulation of defensive AI weapons is in question

---

The speaker from the Department of Nigeria seeks predictions about Africa's state in 2024.

---

The speaker stresses the importance of access to data for development of artificial intelligence

---

The speaker advocates for an international regulation to allow equal data access for all regions

Supporting facts:

• Copyright law is not uniform worldwide, restricting data access in some regions

---

Audience member questions the balance between small scale, decentralized AI systems and larger tech AI systems in terms of intellectual property and interoperability.

Supporting facts:

• The preference for small companies and decentralized AI systems has been discussed

• Skepticism was noted about the proliferation of numerous AI models such as generative AI in terms of their interoperability and potential to cause confusion

---

Report

The issue of regulating and prohibiting artificial intelligence (AI) in the military domain is currently a subject of ongoing discussions, with no clear consensus reached thus far. One of the key challenges is that the rapid technological advancements in AI are outpacing the development of institutional or multilateral frameworks to address its use in the military.

Moreover, different international communities have divergent views on the need for regulation. However, there is a growing sense of urgency to regulate or prohibit the use of AI in the military. The main concerns revolve around the development and deployment of lethal autonomous weapon systems.

There is a fear that AI-powered weapons could act autonomously, making decisions on their own without human intervention, potentially leading to grave consequences. Some argue that existing International Humanitarian Law provisions are insufficient to address the ethical and legal implications of such weapons.

Another crucial aspect that needs to be addressed is the concept of meaningful human control over AI. The question arises as to how much control humans should have over AI systems, especially in the context of military applications. This issue raises important ethical considerations, as well as the need to establish clear guidelines and standards.

Additionally, the potential bias in AI target acquisition is another area of concern. It is crucial to carefully examine and mitigate any biases that may exist in AI systems, particularly when it comes to identifying and targeting individuals or groups.

This is essential to ensure fairness, prevent discrimination, and uphold human rights. The regulation of defensive AI weapons is also a topic of debate. There is a need to determine the appropriate level of regulation for defensive AI systems, considering factors such as their effectiveness, potential risks, and ethical implications.

However, reaching an agreement on what should and can be regulated in terms of AI is proving difficult. Due to the complex and rapidly evolving nature of AI, it is challenging to find consensus among stakeholders with different perspectives, priorities, and interests.

Beyond the military domain, discussions have emerged regarding the future of Africa in 2024. Seeking predictions about Africa's state in the near future highlights the interest in understanding the potential impact of AI on the continent's development, particularly in sectors related to decent work, economic growth, and innovation.

Furthermore, access to data is considered crucial for the development and advancement of AI technologies. Ensuring equal access to data is seen as vital for promoting fairness and reducing inequalities. Advocates argue for the need to establish international regulations that facilitate data access for all regions, taking into account the variations in copyright laws that restrict data accessibility in some areas.

Fair use is also seen as a potential mechanism to ensure equal access to data. Fair use policies would provide a framework that enables the utilization of data for the development of AI while still respecting intellectual property rights and encouraging innovation.

A notable concern raised during discussions is the balance between small-scale, decentralized AI systems and larger tech AI systems. Intellectual property and interoperability are key considerations in this regard. Skepticism exists regarding the proliferation of numerous AI models, such as generative AI, and the potential challenges they pose in terms of interoperability and confusion.

It is important to find an equilibrium that allows for innovation and competition while upholding intellectual property rights and ensuring compatibility between different AI systems. In conclusion, the regulation and prohibition of AI in the military domain remains a topic of ongoing debate.

Urgency is being felt due to concerns over lethal autonomous weapon systems and the need for meaningful human control. The bias in AI target acquisition and the regulation of defensive AI weapons also require careful consideration. However, reaching a consensus on AI regulation is proving challenging.

Additionally, there are discussions about the future of Africa and the importance of data access for AI development, along with advocacy for international regulations and fair use policies. Striking the right balance between small-scale and larger tech AI systems is another area of concern.

Further discussions and analysis are necessary to fully understand the implications of AI's growth and proliferation.

Arguments

2024 will be an important year in the field of artificial intelligence, but it will more likely prepare ground for decisive decisions in the coming years.

Supporting facts:

• Diplo Foundation and Geneva Internet Platform conduct analyses on the critical question of digital governance and the impact of AI.

• Technology is changing faster than society.

---

Artificial Intelligence's impact on day-to-day activities will be the main focus in 2024

Supporting facts:

• 2023 was a year of great excitement with impactful developments in AI like the Charge EPT in November

• Towards the end of 2023, the focus started shifting towards questioning the real impacts of AI

---

Diplo Foundation is utilizing AI in its operations

Supporting facts:

• Diplo Foundation is offering AI-based courses

• Diplo Foundation has its own AI engine and a dedicated lab

---

There is a need to understand how AI functions instead of just talking about it

Supporting facts:

• Diplo's AI system is built on decades of knowledge developed by its community

---

The EU AI Act and Council of Europe AI regulation bring a balance between different types of risks

Supporting facts:

• The EU AI Act and the Council of Europe AI regulation address both extinction risks and immediate risks from AI and also highlighted exclusivity risks

---

The effect of Brussels' regulations will continue into 2024 and beyond

Supporting facts:

• Brussels' effect revolves around data protection regulation (GDPR) which was then adopted worldwide

---

Big tech companies are accumulating a huge amount of the global knowledge

Supporting facts:

• Data put into the context is more valuable than the raw data itself

---

There might be no collision but tensions can rise between the European Union and big tech companies

Supporting facts:

• Discussions regarding the use of AI, social media, content, and the fiscal issues which OECD is trying to resolve.

• The EU has now sufficient political wisdom and experience to bring a balanced discussion not focusing only on AI but other issues as well.

---

There is a bipolar prism or view between the United States and China in terms of AI and internet geopolitics

Supporting facts:

• This is still dominant

---

The dynamics are more diverse and nuanced within regions such as Europe, Middle East, and India

Supporting facts:

• UK focuses more on extinction risk

• France focusing on open source AI

• Middle East is investing in open source AI

• India is a major digital power

---

Rich kingdoms in the Middle East are investing heavily in open source AI

Supporting facts:

• UAE launched Falcon open source AI platform

---

There is a major competition for computational power

---

US and Western countries hold the best technology for microprocessor production

Supporting facts:

• US and Western countries have the cutting edge technology when it comes to production of microprocessor

---

China's advancement in microprocessor technology was underestimated

Supporting facts:

• China came up with a surprise of a seven nanometers processor, which is in the latest Huawei mobile

---

Countries from the Gulf region are closing the technology gap fast

Supporting facts:

• NVIDIA, which is producing the graphical processing cards, are in the center of this game with huge orders, from Emirates, Saudi Arabia

---

AI will affect elections negatively through generation of deepfakes

Supporting facts:

• There are two AI tools to detect misuse of artificial intelligence deepfakes, but there will be more production of these materials than detection in 2024

---

2024 will be politically and socially bumpy

---

Silicon Valley traditionally aligns closer to the Democrats

Supporting facts:

• Traditionally, Silicon Valley is closer to the Democrats

---

There is bipartisan agreement on the need to address issues with content, particularly Section 230

Supporting facts:

• Both parties agree that something has to be done with Section 230

---

Artificial Intelligence is being used extensively in political campaigns and businesses.

Supporting facts:

• Politicians like Biden and Trump have powerful machinery behind their campaigns.

---

The current trend is towards big tech companies as their shares are increasing

Supporting facts:

• Microsoft shares increased substantially

• General increase of shares of tech companies

---

Expects pushback and more compliance pressure on tech companies

Supporting facts:

• Situation in China where there was a strong push on tech companies

• Concerns around AI risks, content policy, and taxation

---

Bottom-up AI should allow people to retain ownership of the knowledge they create

Supporting facts:

• Bottom-up AI is based on the premise that knowledge that two people create should belong to them, not some centralized entity

• Communities, companies, countries and citizens should develop their small AI models

---

Knowledge should remain the common heritage of mankind, not owned by corporations

Supporting facts:

• Corporations could potentially monopolize knowledge and charge fees for access to it

---

Geneva has potential to play a leading role in AI revolution

Supporting facts:

• Geneva has numerous advantages in this competition, including tradition, innovation capacity.

• It has a governance experience.

• Many influential thinkers like Rousseau, Voltaire, Borges were part of Geneva's history.

---

Diplomats should focus less on bureaucratic tasks and more on practical diplomacy

Supporting facts:

• Jovan Kurbalija believes there should be a shift from 'bureaucratic diplomacy' to 'real diplomacy'

---

AI can do report generation with the quality of 95, 96%

Supporting facts:

• Today's event that we discuss, if there is a French diplomat in the room, we mentioned Paris and the initiative of open AI

---

Not just repeating the discussions, but the quality reporting by AI is going to make a major change in modus operandi in Geneva, in governments worldwide

Supporting facts:

• He or she will take the report written by AI, which provides facts of what we discussed, which provides reflections, and then add maybe paragraph on the top

---

Geneva is somewhat lagging behind in making its position on the digital map.

Supporting facts:

• UK and France are moving faster in the digital sphere

• Geneva needs a faster reaction and adaptation in the AI era

---

The common challenges posed by AI might lead to negotiations and cooperation among big empires

Supporting facts:

• All authorities will face common questions and issues when it comes to adapting to the effects of AI, from its impact on jobs to public spaces.

---

AI should be regulated

Supporting facts:

• AI is not one thing. AI is now integrated into weaponary systems, into drones, into other tools

• it became more intertwined in different types of military and military operation

---

The best approach to regulating AI may by applying existing laws, such as consumer and data protection regulation

Supporting facts:

• The EU AI Act used existing laws to regulate AI

---

Africa's dilemma is a dilemma that many countries have in Europe in different respects because the model is the same - collecting data and knowledge for the development of huge AI models.

Supporting facts:

• The centralization of AI knowledge is now in a few big tech companies

---

African voices are weak in the global negotiation for data protection and negotiation with big tech companies.

Supporting facts:

• Unlike Europe, Africa has less instruments and tools to protect its interests in regards to data and AI

---

Big tech countries are currently not accountable in the field of Ai and there is very little transparency

Supporting facts:

• No global watchdog currently accountable for ensuring fair play in the field of AI

---

Propects of AI should consider current problems and dilemmas including credit attribution

Supporting facts:

• AI can generate answers based on what knowledge and data it is generating, it is technically possible

---

Artificial Intelligence will be used more frequently in cyber security activities by hackers and malware creators.

Supporting facts:

• AI has already been misused by script kiddies and amateur hackers.

• There is a strong pushback from AI-based cybersecurity tools producers.

---

AI-based tools can be effective in detecting and preventing cyber attacks.

Supporting facts:

• 60-40 distribution in favor of misuse detection and prevention.

---

If society decides to have centralized model, it should be done with transparency

Supporting facts:

• Open source AI models can be misused

• Proprietary models are not transparent

---

Interoperability is a huge problem in the AI system

Supporting facts:

• There is no way to move with all connections from one platform to another

---

The future of interoperability around AI would be based on weights

Supporting facts:

• A system of interoperability of the weights can be technically created but big players are not allowing it

---

The sharp focus on AI is overshadowing other important issues

Supporting facts:

• AI dominates limited bandwidth of policy diplomatic academic communities

• Developing countries need focus on infrastructure, standardization, data protection, cyber security, e-commerce

---

The financial capacity to train large language models with a bottom-up AI model is no longer a major hurdle.

Supporting facts:

• Some large language models can now be run on notebooks.

• Processing capacity is not the main issue.

• Companies are creating synthetic data to use.

---

The next challenge in AI will be the production of high-quality, small data.

Supporting facts:

• The largest companies like OpenAI will soon exhaust all available data and knowledge.

• OpenAI is already creating synthetic data.

• High-quality small data aids AI processing on less powerful systems.

---

Report

The year 2024 is expected to be significant in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), as it sets the stage for crucial decisions that will shape the future of AI. One of the main focuses in 2024 will be the impact of AI on day-to-day activities.

Developments in AI technology have been rapidly changing society and it is important to understand how AI is influencing various aspects of our lives. Another area of focus will be the role of AI in education and diplomacy. The Diplo Foundation, for example, utilises AI in its operations and offers AI-based courses.

Integrating AI into these sectors has the potential to streamline processes and enhance efficiency. It is crucial to explore both the positive and negative impacts of AI. Toward the end of 2023, there was growing clarity about the role of AI in our lives, and 2024 will continue to delve into the ways AI impacts us.

One area of concern is the risk of exclusivity, which refers to certain communities being marginalised or excluded due to AI development. This highlights the importance of ensuring equitable access and opportunities in the AI landscape. Furthermore, big tech companies are accumulating a vast amount of global knowledge.

The data they collect is becoming increasingly valuable, and there are concerns about the centralisation of this knowledge and the potential for it to be monopolised by corporations. The EU AI Act and the Council of Europe AI regulation aim to address these risks and bring balance to the AI field.

The impact of Brussels' regulations, particularly in areas such as data protection (GDPR), will continue to reverberate in 2024 and beyond. However, tensions may arise between the European Union and big tech companies as regulations and discussions intensify. The battle for computational power, specifically in microprocessor technology, remains a significant aspect of AI development.

While the US and Western countries currently hold the cutting-edge technology for microprocessor production, countries in the Gulf region, such as the UAE, are closing the technology gap rapidly. It is uncertain who will come out on top in this struggle for microprocessors.

AI's impact on various fields, including politics, elections, and business, cannot be ignored. AI is extensively used in political campaigns and businesses, and politicians like Biden and Trump rely on AI for their campaigns. However, deepfakes generated by AI pose a negative impact on elections, and 2024 is expected to be a politically and socially turbulent year.

The regulation of AI is a complex issue. While there is bipartisan agreement on the need to address issues with content, particularly Section 230, the practicality and effectiveness of regulating AI remain uncertain. The misuse of AI in cybersecurity activities by hackers and malware creators is a growing concern, but AI-based tools can also be effective in detecting and preventing cyber-attacks.

Geneva, with its rich history and tradition, is seen as having the potential to play a leading role in the AI revolution. The city's experience in governance and its capacity for innovation make it a promising hub for AI development.

However, there is a need for Geneva to adapt faster in the digital sphere to fully capitalize on this potential. The global discussion on AI should be more balanced and informed. While AI dominates the limited bandwidth of policy, diplomatic, and academic communities, it is essential to address other important issues beyond AI.

The financial capacity to train large language models is no longer a major hurdle, and the production of high-quality, small data becomes a new challenge in AI. In conclusion, the year 2024 will be significant for the field of AI. There will be a focus on the impact of AI on day-to-day activities, education, and diplomacy.

It is important to consider both the positive and negative impacts of AI, address the risks of exclusivity and knowledge accumulation by big tech companies, and establish regulations that bring balance to the AI field. The battle for computational power, the impact of AI in politics and elections, and the challenges of cybersecurity in the AI era will also continue to shape the AI landscape.

Furthermore, Geneva has the potential to play a leading role in the AI revolution, and efforts should be made to ensure a more balanced and informed global discussion on AI.

Arguments

Question about accountability of big tech countries in AI, possible global watchdog

---

Sharp focus on artificial intelligence is raising concerns about neglecting other issues

Supporting facts:

• People from the online chat wondered if intense AI focus comes at the expense of other issues

---

Report

The discussion centres around the accountability of big tech countries in the sphere of artificial intelligence (AI) and the potential need for a global watchdog. This raises concerns about the transparency and fairness of these countries' actions in the field.

The question arises as to whether these countries can be trusted to act responsibly and uphold ethical standards in the development and deployment of AI technologies. Furthermore, there is a growing debate about whether the intense focus on AI is resulting in the neglect of other important issues.

Some people have expressed concerns that the tremendous emphasis on AI may divert attention and resources away from addressing pressing global challenges in areas such as poverty alleviation, healthcare, and environmental sustainability. The online chat participants questioned if this singular focus on AI comes at the expense of these other crucial issues.

The motivation behind this strong emphasis on AI is also a matter of discussion. It is unclear if the prioritisation of AI is a deliberate choice or simply a manifestation of humans' tendency to be one-track thinkers. The query highlights the uncertainty surrounding whether the current AI focus is intentional or if it is a consequence of human nature to become fixated on particular areas of interest.

Taking all these points into account, it becomes apparent that there is a need for greater accountability and oversight in the big tech countries' AI activities. The call for a global watchdog stems from concerns over potential abuses and unethical practices in the AI industry.

Additionally, it is essential to maintain a balanced approach to ensure that the scientific advancements in AI are accompanied by progress in other crucial areas that require attention and resources. In conclusion, the discussion highlights the importance of addressing the accountability of big tech countries in the realm of AI and the potential requirement for a global watchdog.

The transparency and fairness of these actors are under scrutiny, as is the potential neglect of other important global issues due to the intensive focus on AI. It remains uncertain whether this focus is intentional or the result of human nature.

Ultimately, a balanced approach is crucial to ensure ethical practices in AI development and progress in other key areas of global concern.

Arguments

Richard Werly predicts that 2024 would be a crucial and important year in the field of artificial intelligence.

Supporting facts:

• This is an annual exercise conducted by Dr. Yuvan Kobalyia and the staff of the Diplo Foundation.

• The Diplo Foundation regularly produces reports, analysis, and reviews on the impact of AI on digital governance, daily lives, international organizations and geopolitics.

---

Richard Werly expects significant developments in the field of artificial intelligence in the coming years.

Supporting facts:

• Werly questioned if artificial intelligence will have a more significant impact on daily life in the coming years than it did in 2023.

---

Jovan Kurbalija believes that U.S., Europe, and China play crucial roles in the production of nanometers processor technology

Supporting facts:

• US and Europe have kept themselves at the forefront of technological innovations.

• China surprised everyone with the development of the seven nanometers processor, expected to take three to four years to create.

• Current battle over who will lead in the future is ongoing.

---

Richard Werly expresses concern that Geneva might be lagging behind in terms of positioning itself on the digital map

Supporting facts:

• Other countries like UK and France are making noticeable strides in the digital sphere

---

The re-emergence of big empires or countries with imperial ambitions is causing difficulties for multilateral organizations like the UN

Supporting facts:

• UN and other multilateral organizations are facing difficulties in various fields due to the re-emergence of big empires or countries with imperial ambitions

---

Report

In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), Richard Werly predicts that 2024 will be a crucial and important year. He expects significant developments in AI in the coming years, questioning whether it will have a more significant impact on daily life than it did in 2023.

Werly emphasizes the importance of staying informed about digital governance and AI, recommending subscribing to the Digital Watch weekly newsletter for regular updates. He also notes that the Geneva Digital Watch is available in French, promoting accessibility to information. Werly holds the Diplo Foundation's work in digital governance in high regard, acknowledging their research and publications.

The Diplo Foundation regularly produces reports, analysis, and reviews on the impact of AI on digital governance, daily lives, international organizations, and geopolitics. He highlights their critical focus on digital governance issues and their production of the Geneva Digital Atlas, which assesses organizations' digital governance.

Jovan Kurbalija emphasizes the crucial roles played by the US, Europe, and China in the production of nanometer processor technology. He notes that the US and Europe have stayed at the forefront of technological innovations, while China has surprised everyone with the development of the seven-nanometer processor.

This development is expected to take three to four years to create and has sparked a battle over who will lead in the future. Kurbalija asserts the importance of these countries in shaping the future of nanometer processor technology. Richard Werly expresses concerns about the interrelation of geopolitics and their impact on worldwide trade and the production of essential computer parts.

He specifically mentions the upcoming Taiwan election as a potentially disruptive factor, as geopolitical tensions in regions such as Taiwan can impact the production and distribution of important tech components. These disruptions can extend beyond their direct effects and affect areas such as worldwide trade and technology.

There is speculation about the potential role of AI in interfering with the American presidential election in 2024. Werly raises concerns about the possibility of AI being used to manipulate political events. This highlights the need for vigilance and safeguards against potential interference or misuse of AI in political processes.

Werly observes that Geneva may be lagging behind in positioning itself on the digital map compared to countries like the UK and France. He expresses concern about Geneva's progress in the digital sector and its efforts to secure its position over the past 20 years.

This reflects the competitive landscape in the digital sphere and prompts consideration of strategies to enhance Geneva's digital presence. The re-emergence of big empires or countries with imperial ambitions poses difficulties for multilateral organizations like the United Nations (UN). Werly points out that the UN and other multilateral organizations are facing challenges due to the assertive actions of these big empires.

This underscores the need for increased multilateralism, especially in fields such as the internet, AI, and digital governance, where negotiations with these big empires are more likely to occur. Overall, the insights gained from these summaries highlight the evolving landscape of AI, the importance of digital governance, and the impact of geopolitical factors on worldwide trade, technology, and multilateral organizations.

They also underscore the need for continuous vigilance and collaboration to navigate these complex issues effectively.