This was a "dialogue for the sake of dialogue." Apart from agreeing that AI presents both opportunities and risks for humanity and requires global governance, the two sides did not reach any consensus or achieve any concrete results.
Excellent piece. Very important distinction on the way both sides are approaching the AI dialogue. Neither side as a clear AI "interagency process." Different government bodies have different authorities a ND agendas. No one body is focused on an AI governance for the advanced large language and multimodal models and AGI. Very interesting to see which organizations in China are clearly part of an emerging Chinese AI interagency. In the US, AI policy has been primarily run out of the White House. This is not sustainable...
Thank you, Paul. Fully agree with you. I think different agencies in China are still competing for the leadership in AI governance both domestically and globally, and it also involves debates regarding national security will prevail or AI industrial development will do. For a long time, that will likely be one coordinating(but not leading) agency and other participating agencies(but still very important and have big influence to policy in specific area). In terms of global governance, the top "AI security" issue is probably China's rights of development in AI under US restrictions rather than AI's potential being used to make nuclear/bio weapons.
Excellent piece. Very important distinction on the way both sides are approaching the AI dialogue. Neither side as a clear AI "interagency process." Different government bodies have different authorities a ND agendas. No one body is focused on an AI governance for the advanced large language and multimodal models and AGI. Very interesting to see which organizations in China are clearly part of an emerging Chinese AI interagency. In the US, AI policy has been primarily run out of the White House. This is not sustainable...
Thank you, Paul. Fully agree with you. I think different agencies in China are still competing for the leadership in AI governance both domestically and globally, and it also involves debates regarding national security will prevail or AI industrial development will do. For a long time, that will likely be one coordinating(but not leading) agency and other participating agencies(but still very important and have big influence to policy in specific area). In terms of global governance, the top "AI security" issue is probably China's rights of development in AI under US restrictions rather than AI's potential being used to make nuclear/bio weapons.