Prime Minister Zlatko Lagumdzija, Member of the History of AI Board and Mentor of AIWS.net, contributed a chapter for the United Nations Centennial e-book. Here is the concluding sections of his chapter:
Now, with AIWS that include: 7-layer model, Social Contract for the AI Age, Framework for AIIA, Concept of new economy and finance system, AIWS Values and the AIWS City, it can be concluded that AIWS become a doctrine for remaking the world – the Age of Global Enlightenment.
Sixty years ago, President John F. Kennedy put the United States on a mission to the future. “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish.”
Our generation’s Moonshot is not going to Mars or living on the Moon but having a shared future in shared societies, prosperity and sustainable development on Earth while avoiding and managing nuclear threats, avoiding climate change and mastering technological disruption and AI. Today it is not only that we are incomparably more technologically powerful but economically as well.
Our generation Mission Moonshot – Living on Planet Earth – is not possible only because we have technological or economic power but it requires that the World is being more defined by the “Golden” word of our future – Shared.
Shared: Societies, Sustainable Development, Vision, Values, Peace, Prosperity, Wellbeing, Education, Economy, Technology, Knowledge, Responsibility, and Leadership for the future in Dignity.
Shared and sustainable societies as ones in which all individuals have a common sense of belonging and responsibility where inclusion and their identity differences are their asset not their liability.
We are all different, as a people and as a nation, but at the same time there is much more that puts us together while understanding each other, than divide us along different lines while confronting us.
Professor Judea Pearl, 2020 World Leader in AIWS Award and Mentor of AIWS.net, contributes his new methodology in AI to the United Nations Centennial e-book. He wrote:
This is the first time I am using the word “domestication” to describe what happened in causality-land in the past 3 decades. I’ve used other terms before: “democratization,” “mathematization,” or “algorithmization,” but Domestication sounds less provocative when I come to talk about the causal revolution.
What makes it a “revolution” is seeing dozens of practical and conceptional problems that only a few decades ago where thought to be metaphysical or unsolvable give way to simple mathematical solutions.
“DEEP UNDERSTANDING” is another term used here for the first time. It so happened that, while laboring to squeeze out results from causal inference engines, I came to realize that we are sitting on a gold mine, and what we are dealing with is none other but:
A computational model of a mental state that deserves the title “Deep Understanding”
“Deep Understanding” is not the nebulous concept that you probably think it is, but something that is defined formally as any system capable of covering all 3 levels of the causal hierarchy: What is – What if – Only if. More specifically: What if I see (prediction) – What if I do (intervention) – and what if acted differently (retrospection, in light of the outcomes observed).
This may sound like cheating – I take the capabilities of one system (i.e., a causal model) and I posit them as a general criterion for defining a general concept such as: “Deep Understanding.”
It isn’t cheating. Given that causal reasoning is so deeply woven into our day to day language, our thinking, our sense of justice, our humor and of course our scientific understanding, I think that it won’t be too presumptuous of me to propose that we take Causal Modeling as a testing ground of ideas on other modes of reasoning associated with “understanding.”
Specifically, causal models should provide an arena for various theories explanations, fairness, adaptation, imagination, humor, consciousness, free will, attention, and curiosity.
I also dare speculate that learning from the way causal reasoning was domesticated, would benefit researchers in other area of AI, including vision and NLP, and enable them to examine whether similar paths could be pursued to overcome obstacles that data-centric paradigms have imposed.
I would like now to say a few words on the Anti-Cultural implications of the Causal revolution. Here I refer you to my blog post, https://ucla.in/32YKcWy where I argue that radical empiricism is a stifling culture. It lures researchers into a data-centric paradigm, according to which Data is the source of all knowledge rather than a window through which we learn about the world around us.
What I advocate is a hybrid system that supplements data with domain knowledge, commonsense constraints, culturally transmitted concepts, and most importantly, our innate causal templates that enable toddlers to quickly acquire an understanding of their toy-world environment.
It is hard to find a needle in a hay stack, it is much harder if you haven’t seen a needle before. The module we are using for causal inference gives us a picture of what the needle looks like and what you can do once you find one.
On May 27, 2021, the United Nations Academic Impact and Boston Global Forum will officially launch the e-book of the United Nations Centennial Book.
Mr. Ramu Damodaran, Chief of United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI) and co-Chair of BGF-UNAI Centennial Initiative, in honor of the United Nations 2045 Centenary, wrote introduction of the book:
“When my cherished friend Tuan Nguyen of the Boston Global Forum (BGF) and I spoke two years ago on how BGF and the United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI) could mark the 75th anniversary of the United Nations, his ever restless mind raced forward and asked “why not think of the UN at 100?” And so this centennial project began, bringing into its fold some of the finest minds of our times, minds that have anticipated the world we live in today, its terrain of rose and thorn, minds possessed of imagination and reason in looking a quarter century ahead. UNAI was privileged to publish a series of these articles on our website, curated by Tuan, reflecting its mission of being a movement of minds.
Had we embarked on such an exercise in 1995, could we have been better prepared for the extraordinary pace in which our world has moved since then? More particularly, could we have anticipated, and even created, the opportunities of collective, concerted global action, infused by the spirit of the United Nations, to protect us from dangers we foresaw and to seize the possibilities then dimly on horizon?
The United Nations came into being as a cerebral , as much as political, innovation , the very first resolution of its General Assembly, in the January of 1946, was on the “problems arising from the discovery of atomic energy.” 75 years later , in the January of 2021, Governor Michael Dukakis announced the “Artificial Intelligence International Accord Initiative” whose goal he described as “to stimulate a global conversation that will make sure AI is used responsibly by governments and the private sector around the world.” It is precisely conversations of that nature this volume, and BGF Roundtables over the past months, have fostered. Conversations that will continue in the quarter century ahead, shaping a world governed by international law and the exercise of international as much as individual, and indeed intellectual, responsibility (which UNAI seeks to foster) where the creativity and innovation of the human person work to shape a world worthy of our times just as surely as that world works to foster and further, in the phrase of our Charter, the “dignity and worth “of that human person.”
The Boston Global Forum and the Michael Dukakis Institute wish to congratulates the EU Commission for the “Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL LAYING DOWN HARMONISED RULES ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACT) AND AMENDING CERTAIN UNION LEGISLATIVE ACTS”
Boston Global Forum and Michael Dukakis Institute introduced this concept: In 2017 we publicly framed and pushed this initiative at AI World Society. It was warmly welcomed as the Initiative for G7 Summit in Canada in 2018. We have also put forth the Social Contract for the AI Age on September 9, 2020. And, in April 28, 2021, we made public a draft of Framework for AI International Accord on.
The Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL LAYING DOWN HARMONISED RULES ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACT) AND AMENDING CERTAIN UNION LEGISLATIVE ACTS has generated wide public discussion. Boston Global Forum and World Leadership Alliance-Club de Madrid will co-organize a dialogue among EU, US, Japanese, Australian leaders, multinational technology company executives, and distinguished scholars at our joint Policy Lab on 22-24 June, 2021. The focus will be on Fundamental Rights in AI & Digital Societies: Towards an International Accord. Several former Presidents and Prime Ministers — members of Club de Madrid — will attend this event.
The discussion will be open and frank, anchored in the constructive spirit of leaders and decision makers who seek to contribute to a solid legal foundation for an AI World Society. We believe this AI World Society will be practical and comprehensive, as well as human centric. It will chart a new path for humanity in The Age of Global Enlightenment.
AIWS City is an initiative for the United Nations Centennial.
The AIWS City to be an application and a practice of what Vint Cerf, father of the Internet, has called “The People Centered Economy.” The core concept, in Vint Cerf’s words is as follows: “All people can create value for each other. A good economy has an ecosystem of organizations that lets that happen in the most meaningful and fulfilling ways.”
As a pragmatic vision, AIWS City is to be based on AIWS Value in order to create a good Ecosystem of the People Centered Economy – “all people can create value for each other”. The operational slogan is “People Centered AI and Internet Ecosystem for Work and Life”. In this context, AIWS puts forth the concept of AIWS Value as follows: AIWS Value =: • traditional value (products, services, data, innovation, creativities, etc.) X • social values (contributions). We consider this as a multiplicative not an additive function This enables a situation where society recognize traditional and social values and can exchange them for AIWS Reward as a digital currency. AIWS Rewards can be exchanged to other values as such products, services, money.
AIWS City will support political and social innovations by presenting them AIWS Rewards based on effectiveness and benefits for improving societies. This is a part of the United Nations Centennial Initiative.
Mr. Ramu Damodaran, Chief Academic Impact of the United Nations, co-founder and co-chair of the United Nations Centennial Initiative.
On May 27, 2021, the United Nations Academic Impact and the Boston Global Forum will co-launch the e-book “The United Nations Centennial: Remaking the world – The Age of Global Enlightenment”.
Governor Michael Dukakis, Chair of the Boston Global Forum and Mr. Ramu Damodaran, Chief Academic Impact of the United Nations are co-publishers.
Governor Michael Dukakis, Professor Thomas Patterson, and Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan will introduce how AIWS will be remaking politics and society in the AI and Digital Age in a special chapter of this book. The Framework for the AI International Accord, prepared by Professor Nazli Choucri and the AI International Accord team, also will be in the book.
This book also introduces significant ideas and messages of World Leaders for Peace and Security and World Leaders in AI World Society such as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon, EU Ambassador to the US Stavros Lambrinidis and others.
I would like to warmly compliment Prof. Choucri for a masterly compilation of a concise, and yet comprehensive, paper outlining the elements of an AIIA, capturing the intricacies of the issues involved and appreciating the breadth of the challenges.
She makes the absolutely valid point that transformation of AI innovations and applications are moving ahead of our collective ability to fully appreciate the opportunities and threats that they generate. It is an equally valid point that, while countries are developing their own AI policies (at different levels of sophistication), there has been very little realization of the urgent need for an international regime that promotes cooperation on AI applications for human progress and mitigating their destructive potential.
I am almost entirely in agreement with the deliverables she has identified and the methodology of approach to them. What I will add here are comments on some of the aspects covered in the draft.
The need for inclusiveness in this international accord merits particular emphasis. The borderless nature of AI tools means that those excluded would have no incentive not to use them to the detriment of others. The need to maximize the number inside the tent is obvious.
It follows from this that we should not limit AIIA to democracies. In any case, there are too many “models” of democracy these days and variances even within each. The important criterion should be the willingness to abide by agreed norms; not the system of governance. Vietnam, for example, is not called a democracy, but is a disciplined member of the international community, abiding by international law. Exclusion of Vietnam and countries like it, on the grounds of their domestic system of governance, would be counterproductive.
The draft rightly assigns to national authorities the discretion to determine the manner of AI governance within their countries, while requiring them to abide by the discipline of the international accord. This is wise. As we see today, even among democracies, there are different practices and different interpretations of the ethics of reconciling the conflicting interests of human rights, law enforcement and preventive security measures. The balance that each country will find would depend on its historical experiences, social consciousness and threat perceptions. Prescriptive provisions threaten disruption of the international accord.
A cautionary note on sanctions that are envisaged to enforce adherence to the Accord. Recent experience of unilateral primary and secondary sanctions underlines the need for carefully defining the scope and applicability of sanctions, identifying clearly the objective conditions which would trigger the sanctions, and the methodology of applying and lifting the sanctions.
The draft makes the important point of variances in the levels of AI-capability across the world and the need for capacity-building. We need to be conscious of the dangers of a new digital divide, which would widen global social and economic inequalities, with consequent threats to peace and security.
This lab is a transatlantic dialog between leaders, policymakers, decision makers, business leaders, and distinguished thinkers of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia on AI Regulations of the EU and the Framework for AI International Accord.
There will also be a discussion on the Book “Remaking the world – The Age of the Global Enlightenment” by distinguished leaders and thinkers.
Partnership of the Boston Global Forum, Club de Madrid will seek to contribute to global consensus-building around a rights-based agenda for the governance of AI and digital societies as a part of AI World Society model (AIWS).
The total effect of AI and digital technologies on our societies is far greater than the sum of its parts. As AI and digital technologies revolutionize every facet of modern societies, they also alter how the different social component relate to one another, thereby making our existing social contract obsolete. Applying Social Contract for the Digital and AI Age requires, first and foremost, thoughtful consideration of how the multi-fold transformation driven by AI and digital technologies is affecting fundamental rights in AI and digital societies.
The China question: Beijing supports banning the use of these weapons, but not their development or production. The U.S. and NATO have argued that they need to keep autonomous lethal weapons in their arsenals as deterrence and defense against “malign” actors — all very reminiscent of the Cold War and nuclear politics.
Van Weel, the assistant secretary-general, said: “China has a seamless flow of these new technologies from the private sector into the defense realm. I’m … not sure that they’re having the same debates on principles of responsible use or they’re definitely not applying our democratic values to these technologies.”
Coyle doesn’t trust Beijing either, calling it an “insincere partner in many of their multilateral agreements.”
The article was original published at Politico EU.
The Boston Global Forum and World Leadership Alliance-Club de Madrid are collaborating in building the Framework for AI International Accord (AIIA) and AIIA Policy Lab, which will be organized on June 22-24, 2021.
