The Greed For AI

At the recent AI Action Summit in Paris, a notable rift emerged as the United States and the United Kingdom declined to sign a declaration promoting “inclusive and sustainable” artificial intelligence.

The declaration, endorsed by 60 nations including France, China, and India, emphasizes the importance of AI being “open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure, and trustworthy.”

U.S. Vice President JD Vance spoke about the American stance, cautioning against excessive regulation that could stifle innovation.

His remarks were: “We face the extraordinary prospect of a new Industrial Revolution… but it will never come to pass if over-regulation deters innovators from taking the risks necessary to advance the ball.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer spokesperson stated that the U.K. felt the declaration lacked “practical clarity on global governance” and did not adequately address national security concerns.

So, the USA is basically saying: “We will bring AI into military use and cut down jobs using it. We will not agree to any regulations that say no to this”.

The UK’s stance says: “We will not agree to any regulation where we are not part of the deciding committee”.

The excuses America is giving is concern about potential ideological biases in AI and the risks of authoritarian regimes weaponizing the technology (China, Russia, etc.).

The excuse the UK is giving is that the U.K. would “only ever sign up to initiatives that are in the UK’s national interest.”

I am confused about these statements. Aren’t these statements the very reason why this declaration should be supported by the USA and the UK?

As AI continues to evolve, the greed and superiority complex of the developed nations is making AI governance and regulations more complex to handle.