New Zealand - Seeking your interest in starting the critical conversation around generative AI

We are in this together, is somewhat of an understatement. We are all in this. Everyone.?

Your kids are too. So are our corporate leaders, our politicians, our parents and our neighbours. This is 2023 and the most important thing you can give yourself and your family is the understanding of just how different the world ahead will be from what we know today. The next most important thing you need to be contemplating is what you are prepared to learn, change or give up to be part of a more deliberate and planned future as we plan for massive change on all fronts.

We have all lived with regular change over the last decade. Across the world, climate change protests have become a visible force of activism used to drive awareness to communities of the massive risks if we delay our actions to reduce carbon. We have had years to learn and to understand consequences of global warming, and even with this knowledge, local action is slow.

By comparison, Generative AI did not arrive with advanced notice, or give us the luxury of time to think about whether we wanted it as part of our future. Almost as soon as it became accessible as a helpful tool in our lives, the risks began to be communicated by global senior AI researchers as each touted their own view of a future doomsday scenario shaped by wide scale AI adoption.

In recent weeks, letters asking for moratoriums on AI development have been published by tech giant CEOs and The Center for AI Safety just published a one-sentence statement on AI risks co-signed by more than 350 global executives, researchers and others working in AI, stating “The risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”.?

Meanwhile conversation is quiet on the local front. The only media story I am being asked (on repeat) is my views on the effect generative AI will have on plagiarism and education achievement.?

This is not a time to play the New Zealand ‘small and isolated card’, or to imagine that as a nation of small and medium businesses that we will somehow be immune to the impact of AI as it sweeps through our industries, institutes, government and our jobs.

Under a normal situation our willingness to sit back and watch things play is one of our most redeeming features. We are comfortable letting others lead, especially when there is uncertainty. Our humility is defined by our discomfort in putting our head up above the parapet, especially when there's a chance we might not get things entirely right. Call us humble, but stepping into the limelight to announce there is something brewing that is likely to change everything we know in the future, is a bold call.

However, in the face of research and emerging commentary from experts, combined with the exponential rate that generative AI is advancing I am not prepared to hedge my bets and hope that the AI experts have it wrong. In fact I fully support their views that if we let generative AI go rogue it will be at our peril.?

For clarity, I’m not part of the group who believe AI is about to turn sentient, nor do I support the view that AI over time could form a conscience, as some headlines would suggest. I’m taking a pragmatic, and informed view that generative AI’s competitive advantages, and immediate cost savings for everyday work functions will be the first significant impact on our jobs and our economy. I also believe without widespread understanding and controlled AI adoption, businesses who have not already digitised and ready for the next evolution of technology will be out-manoeuvred by the businesses who jump quickly on to the AI train.?

But it is not just job losses and redundancy of job functions that has me worried. Generative AI uses the abundance of existing human-created data, jam packed with biases and blind spots, to respond to prompts that find the fastest most efficient way to resolve a question.Think of it like Google Maps. When you enter a destination, you are presented the fastest route to get you to your destination. There is no user option for the scenic option, or the one that passes key landmarks or places of interest. It is all about efficiency. Generative AI is the same, it pulls responses from what is determined to be the most efficient or the most likely. Faster, better, cheaper, until there is nowhere left to turn but to the lowest common denominator.

As a country of 5 million, there is no viable economic model that supports us to build industries on scalable efficiency or competitive cut-down pricing. We are already a global outlier due to our small population, who does far better at slow, small scale, personal and unique products and services. Can our adoption of generative AI help build on this uniqueness and enable us to lead through simplicity, and not speed? Could we be world leaders in AI adoption that supports more resilient and sustainable ways of food production, equitable healthcare and personalised education for all??

We live in a time where things move too fast for slow considered debate, especially when we are already seeing how things play out.? Generative AI is here, it will help solve some of our most challenging issues such as climate mitigation and medical advances, but it will knock some people off their feet and leave them wondering what happened.

From where I am sitting, almost all predictions for some sort of catastrophe change (environmental, technological, economic or political) have been publically shortened over recent months, to move from somewhere ‘in the future’ to shorter 10 - 20 year horizons. Some scientists, economists and technologists think even this is optimistic. These predictions all have an element of a perfect storm. The perfect tech, dominated by a young digitally savvy global population, operating in economies with rapidly increasing costs, high inflation and a worldwide talent shortage.?

The problem is, not everyone can see what is coming. Not everyone understands that when over 100 million people sign up to a new tool such as ChatGPT in just a few weeks that this is the biggest step change in the history of technology. Not everyone can imagine how their job could be automated, replaced or redefined. In fact, most people would prefer to imagine that the benefits of generative AI will far outweigh the negatives. I wish I was as certain. But I’m not.

So why aren’t the conversations we all need to be having taking place here, and now? Shouldn’t this be a major election topic or at least one that has executives falling over themselves to gain deeper understanding.

So, somewhat out of my comfort zone I am standing up to see how many others are equally interested in amplifying a national conversation.

I have worked in technology education for over twenty five years and over this time I? have lived and responded to many challenges through disruptive technology.?

But if I am honest, the previous threats around oil supply chain risks, Y2K, and an absence of start-up investment funding feels insignificant by comparison to the shifts we need to be implementing now. Even Covid, feels altogether more predictable by comparison to the uncertainty ahead.

My career has been led through research, informed by foresight and shaped by insights based upon the world around us. I am an experienced technology leader who has had seats at big tables globally where one to one conversations with extraordinary international? leaders on the future of disruptive technologies have paved the way for planned deployment, and yet there is no similar conversation taking place in a local context.

Case and point, I was the Chair of the Digital Equity, Digital Inclusion Ministerial Advisory Group in 2018 leading the conversation on the critical need to appoint a Chief Technology Officer for Aotearoa New Zealand.? Back then, our inability to find national consensus on who and what this role would do meant we removed any possibility of re-exploring this option for years to come. With the benefit of hindsight, having a national CTO in place right now, focused on technology impact would be a great advantage when we are in desperate need of future-defining conversations.

The past week I have been in Lisbon, with 500 other leaders who flew in from around the world to sit and hold hard conversations in the gardens of the late Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the author of Sherlock Holmes. The previous owner of the property where we gathered is of no specific relevance to this letter beyond the fact Arthur loved the genre of science fiction and fantasy. I suspect even in his wildest dreams, Arthur could not imagine what the world looks like in 2023.?

The gathering in Portugal attracted people deeply connected or interested in the trajectory of climate change and AI and how it will change our collective future. It was universally agreed that both AI and climate change are equally vying for first place in the race to alter the future potential of life on our planet.

This four-day event was not a talk fest with polite discourse and aligned conversation. It was not shaped by a political or corporate agenda, but instead conversations were raw, honest and at times shocking as new knowledge was shared.

I listened and I observed. It soon became obvious that I didn’t need to be a deep AI expert to hear the undertone of real concern. My garden-variety knowledge as a technologist was more than enough to understand that behind the tangible concerns was real fear. There was also acknowledgement that there is no ‘slow down’ or ‘turn-off’ option, as there is a global acceptance that generative AI is good. After all, to date? our lived experience of generative AI is one of excitement and possibility.

Imagine having ice cream for the first time and then having someone trying to convince you that ice cream is bad for the future of mankind. Not only would we argue for continued access to ice cream, we would very likely defend our need for ice cream due to the joy it brings all that eat it.

What if I went further and said that consensus is that generative AI could be a planetary crisis in the making. Beyond the loss of jobs and potential loss of meaning in our work, what would a world of idle workers do? How would they support their families? What additional energy would be needed to create to feed the machine, so to speak? What if I told you the minerals we need to extract from the earth to be used in the computers to run AI would require hundreds of new mines across the world over the next ten years? And this would create new environmental challenges that push us closer to the 1.5 degree tipping point?

The consequences all need conversation and serious air time. The flow on effects from the choices we make as a country need to be mapped out alongside other choices. The brave need to lead the brave in fronting conversations of ‘what if’ and not just ‘let’s wait and see’.

I am stepping up to lead a conversation, in whatever form that gives people the ability to talk candidly and to talk through implications. But I can’t do this alone. It is only through a show of hands of concern that others will start paying attention, including people with the power to instigate bigger conversations that lead to change.

All I ask is for your interest in helping be part of a conversation. In the absence of existing conversations I am prepared to start one so that we might find common ground and understanding that we can share with our children, our parents, our colleagues and our regulators.

If you want to be part of an emerging conversation, please add your support below so I can capture the interest in furthering this conversation.?

Let’s bring hard and difficult conversations to the surface, so we might all make informed decisions that won’t have our future children and grandchildren asking ‘what did you do?”.

One person can start a conversation, but it takes a community to make real change. I really hope you join me.

What are other countries doing?

Below are some references to a range of actions by other countries in the face of generative AI.

China's cyberspace regulator in April 2023 unveiled draft measures to manage generative AI services, saying it wanted firms to submit security assessments to authorities before they launch offerings to the public.

The European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) has joined the chorus of concern about ChatGPT and other AI chatbots, calling on EU consumer protection agencies to investigate the technology and the potential harm to individuals.

Twelve EU lawmakers urged world leaders in April to hold a summit to find ways to control the development of advanced AI systems, saying they were developing faster than expected.

The European Data Protection Board, which unites Europe's national privacy watchdogs, said in April it had set up a task force on ChatGPT, a potentially important first step towards a common policy on setting privacy rules on AI.

Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority, one of several state regulators that has been tasked with drawing up new guidelines covering AI, is consulting with the Alan Turing Institute and other legal and academic institutions to improve its understanding of the technology, a spokesperson told Reuters.

Britain's competition regulator said on May 4 it would start examining the impact of AI on consumers, businesses and the economy and whether new controls were needed.

Israel has been working on AI regulations "for the last 18 months or so" to achieve the right balance between innovation and the preservation of human rights and civic safeguards, Ziv Katzir, director of national AI planning at the Israel Innovation Authority, said in June.

Israel published a 115-page draft AI policy in October 2022 and is collating public feedback ahead of a final decision.

In October 2023, Latin American governments will reunite in Santiago de Chile to discuss regional measures regarding AI ethics and governance, including the emerging regulatory landscape for the deployment of generative AI systems and tools. This meeting will be organized by UNESCO and the Corporacion Andina de Fomento (CAF), a Latin-America-based development bank, as a regional initiative to determine the future of AI governance in the region and to foster collaboration among different countries and organizations

The U.S. White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is seeking comments through 7 July, as the Biden administration develops a national artificial intelligence strategy to harness benefits and mitigate risks of AI. "This strategy will build on the actions that the Federal Government has already taken to responsibly advance the development and use of AI," the request stated.

The EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council published a joint statement that reaffirms its commitment to a risk-based approach advancing "trustworthy and responsible AI technologies." It added, "Cooperating on our approaches is key to promoting responsible AI innovation that respects rights and safety and ensures that AI provides benefits in line with our shared democratic values."