Global Governance of AI: Does Safe Passage (of AI Ethics) Become a Luxury Good?

Good way to start the New Year...with an analogy.

Just uploaded my many papers to GoogleNotebookLM and it came up this analogy. I used it to come up with the picture (three prompts). Full disclosure - I don't know how much carbon, water, e-waste and other resources were used. Hopefully no copyrights were infringed but tells you what a murky area we are navigating.

The Analogy is Below.

"Governing AI is like managing a global ocean navigation system. While the lighthouse (regulations) provides a common direction to avoid shipwrecks (human rights harms), each vessel must have a skilled captain (human oversight) who understands the local currents (cultural context) and ensures the engines (technological progress) don't pollute the very waters (society) they cross. Just as no single nation owns the sea, the governance of these digital waters requires a coordinated global effort to ensure safe and equitable passage for all."

The challenge is on one hand the cost of building safe AI and its compliance - the cost of compliance for safe AI systems is highly variable (estimated

annual costs per high-risk AI model at around €52,000, which includes certification and governance expenses).

On the other hand much knowledge is free so building robust systems needs diversity of thought and a will to listen (not always speed). Speed also hinders human oversight as we are not designed or trained to function like AI. Hence building a system that optimizes human oversight and complements our abilities is critical to governance.

I also have an audio of this: link below (4 minutes). Scary how close the voices are almost human -like. Audio link: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/45ab5kiifsn0025etyfmp/Global_AI_Guardrails_Are_Not_Optional.m4a?rlkey=inua3unszgl07jpm56a68b09p&dl=0

More information on the cost of compliance: https://verityai.co/blog/ai-compliance-cost-calculator-internal-vs-external (Should Complaince be aPublic Good?)