Search

Begin New Search Topic Artificial Intelligence Publication Year within 3 Years

31. The role of artificial intelligence in modern warfare

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
The use of artificial intelligence technologies in various armed conflict arenas, such as the Russian-Ukrainian war and the Israeli war in Gaza, has sparked numerous discussions about their nature, risks to international and regional security, and the sustainability of the conflict. These experiments have shown that weapons supported by artificial intelligence can be more accurate than those directed by humans, which can potentially reduce collateral damage, including civilian casualties, damage to residential areas, and the number of soldiers killed or injured. However, it also raises concerns about the possibility of committing disastrous mistakes.
Topic:
Artificial Intelligence, Armed Conflict, Russia-Ukraine War, 2023 Gaza War, and Warfare
Political Geography:
Global Focus

32. Exploring the Application of AI in the Public Sector: The Case of Estonia and Lessons for Georgia

Author:
Salome Abramishvili
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming societies globally, offering unprecedented opportunities across sectors. The integration of AI into the public sector promises enhanced service delivery, efficiency, and significant decision-making improvements. Nations worldwide recognize AI’s strategic importance and are adopting National AI Strategies (NASs) to guide its development and deployment. This paper explores AI’s evolution and impact in the public sector, focusing on applications and strategic frameworks using Estonia as an example—a pioneer in AI governance within the EU. Estonia’s approach serves as a model for Georgia, a country with post-Soviet roots and EU integration aspirations. By examining Estonia’s National AI Strategy and its implementation, this paper identifies key lessons and recommendations for Georgia to develop its tailored strategy.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Public Sector, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe, Estonia, and Georgia

33. AI and the US Economy: Optimism, Pessimism, or Realism?

Author:
Fredrick Hernandez, Zach Moller, and Gabe Horwitz
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
There were 130 websites on the internet in 1993; today there are 1.1 billion.1 Over those 30 years, the US economy quadrupled in nominal size and tripled in per capita income.2 The digital age has been very good for America. But it has also concentrated wealth and opportunity. The richest American in 1993 would only be the 101st richest today in inflation-adjusted dollars.3 There are now 735 billionaires living in America today, compared to fewer than 75 in the world in 1993.4 Meanwhile, the gains for the middle class were not stellar. Real median household income grew a solid, but not spectacular, 32% during the internet age. Most of that gain accrued to the two-fifths of working age America with a college degree.5 “50% to 70% of the changes in the US wage structure are intimately linked to automation, particularly digital automation,” MIT economist Daron Acemoglu estimates.6 That was the digital age. What about the artificial intelligence age? Ask McKinsey partner Michael Chui about AI and he says “it can be great not only for companies but for humankind.”7 But Eliezer Yudkowsky, co-founder of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, said that if someone builds an over-powered AI, he expects “that every single member of the human species and all biological life on Earth dies shortly thereafter.”8 What seems clear is that whether we’re addressing the future of humankind or the well-being of the workforce, policymakers and industries must make intentional choices to get the best of AI and avoid the worst. Since AI will change the way we work and learn, this paper unpacks different economic projections to give policymakers a better read on what this technology will do to everything from American GDP to skill training. Broadly speaking, there are three distinct perspectives on AI and the economy. Optimists predict AI will elevate the working class, accelerate our national prosperity, and lower costs. Pessimists say AI will contribute to income inequality in the United States, jobs will be automated out of existence, and large corporations will gain far more than workers and families. Pragmatists accept AI will have positive benefits to the economy but acknowledge the mixed bag of how it will affect jobs and generally call for specific actions to mitigate harms and spread benefits. Below, we explore the key takeaways from each perspective. This is a product in a multi-year series to help educate policymakers on the implications and policy choices confronting Congress and the Administration on next generation Artificial Intelligence.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economy, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Technologies, and Optimism
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

34. Competing Values Will Shape US-China AI Race

Author:
Valerie Shen and Jim Kessler
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
President Biden’s AI executive order reflects a set of values recognizable to all Americans: Privacy, equal treatment and civil rights; free speech and expression; the rule of law; opportunity and free market capitalism; pluralism; and advancement of global leadership as the beacon of a free world. President Xi Jinping’s government has also issued AI regulations with values recognizable to China: Collectivism and obedience to authority; social harmony and homogeneity; market authoritarianism and rule of state; and digital world hegemony to restore China’s rightful place as the Middle Kingdom. The United States and China may share similar broad goals for “winning” AI along the lines of leading innovation and advancement, spurring broad-based economic growth and prosperity, achieving domestic social stability, and becoming the clear global influencer for the rest of the world—but they define those goals and seek to achieve those ends through very different values. Those values embedded in our respective AI policies and underlying technology carry high-stakes, long-term national and economic security implications as US and Chinese companies compete directly to become dominant in emerging global markets. They also share similar fears that reflect each country’s values. China worries that AI could cause social unrest if information to a sheltered population is too real and unfiltered. America fears that AI could cause social unrest if information Americans receive is too fake. And that massive disinformation and algorithms that rile the population could threaten our democratic system. Why do these value differences matter when it comes to the AI race? Below, we outline six contrasting values that we believe will be the most determinative in how the US-China AI competition plays out. We argue that understanding our different values-based approaches illuminates our respective advantages and disadvantages in this competition. It assesses who is currently set up to “win” across key metrics and determines how to lean into our democratic advantages or mitigate some practical disadvantages compared with the PRC, this will ultimately win the AI marathon.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

35. Nuclear arms control policies and safety in artificial intelligence: Transferable lessons or false equivalence?

Author:
Eoin Micheál McNamara
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Multiple nuclear arms control treaties have collapsed in recent years, but analogies associated with them have returned as possible inspiration to manage risks stemming from artificial intelligence (AI) advancement. Some welcome nuclear arms control analogies as an important aid to understanding strategic competition in AI, while others see them as an irrelevant distraction, weakening the focus on new frameworks to manage AI’s unique and unprecedented aspects. The focus of this debate is sometimes too narrow or overly selective when a wider examination of arms control geopolitics can identify both irrelevant and valuable parallels to assist global security governance for AI. Great power leaders frequently equate AI advancement with arms racing, reasoning that powers lagging behind will soon see their great power status weakened. This logic serves to intensify competition, risking a spiral into more unsafe AI practices. The global norm institutionalization that established nuclear taboos can also stigmatize unethical AI practices. Emphasizing reciprocal risk reduction offers pragmatic starting points for great power management of AI safety. This research is part of the Reignite Multilateralism via Technology (REMIT) project, funded by the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 101094228.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Cybersecurity, Economic Policy, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and United States of America

36. The EU and military AI governance: Forging value-based coalitions in an age of strategic competition

Author:
Katja Creutz, Ville Sinkkonen, Mahmoud Javadi, and Michal Onderco
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has increased dramatically, driving discussion on the best way to govern it. While much of the discussion has focused on AI in the civilian domain, its usage in military applications raises distinct ethical and legal questions that actors increasingly seek to address. Governance initiatives are becoming more common, even though strategic competition between major powers remains a challenge. The EU navigates this governance landscape more hesitantly than in the civilian domain with its Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA). More information is needed regarding what kind of regulation, and especially with whom the Union could pursue such avenues. This paper seeks to address these questions by presenting and analyzing results from an expert survey conducted in autumn 2023 by researchers at Erasmus University Rotterdam. It argues that the EU needs to pursue a broad range of cooperation formats to advance its values and interests in the context of military AI. Strategic multilateralism is needed, especially with like-minded states that share values with the Union.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, European Union, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Europe

37. China’s approach to AI standardisation: State-guided but enterprise-led

Author:
Junhua Zhu
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
AI standardisation is a major battleground in the international AI race, in which states compete against each other for standard-setting power. China sees AI standardisation as a sector in which it could become a norm-maker rather than a norm-taker. The global landscape of AI standardisation is undergoing a phase of reconstruction. The US and China are discussing new bilateral standardisation frameworks, while the significance of pre-existing multilateral standardisation frameworks is declining. The Chinese approach to AI standardisation is found to be heavily reliant on the corporate sector, following an enterprise-led and state-guided pattern. The state cooperates closely with the private sector in a community of practice, acting as a catalyst in the early stage, a supporter in the mid-stage, and a supervisor in the later stage of the AI standardisation process. Enhancing a contextualised understanding of the fast-changing landscape of AI standardisation in China is critical for European policymakers to safeguard Europe’s competitiveness, preserve European values, and engage in dialogue on global AI governance.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Economic Policy, Artificial Intelligence, and Standardization
Political Geography:
China and Asia

38. Concentrating Intelligence: Scaling and Market Structure in Artificial Intelligence

Author:
Anton Korinek and Jai Vipra
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
This paper examines the evolving structure and competition dynamics of the rapidly growing market for foundation models, focusing on large language models (LLMs). We describe the technological characteristics that shape the industry and have given rise to fierce competition among the leading players. The paper analyzes the cost structure of foundation models, emphasizing the importance of key inputs such as computational resources, data, and talent, and identifies significant economies of scale and scope that may create a tendency towards greater market concentration in the future. We explore two concerns for competition, the risk of market tipping and the implications of vertical integration, and use our analysis to inform policy remedies to maintain a competitive landscape.
Topic:
Markets, Economy, Business, Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, and Large Language Models (LLMs)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

39. AI Unleashed or Tamed? Decoding Europe’s Bold Leap with the AI Act

Author:
Arianna Jater
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
2023 saw a boom in generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). However, such a rapid expansion revealed the unpreparedness of governments to handle the unprecedented impact AI systems have on the core values of democratic societies. The European Commission’s AI Act has emerged as the first binding legislation of its kind. It is already clear, however, that simply ratifying the Act will not solve the next challenges. Among those, the immediate one is to ensure that the new AI rulebook is enforced on the national level and that Member States have the resources necessary. Then, the Act, and any future AI legislation, will need to constantly adapt to the ever-changing developments in technology, which now seem to move at a faster pace than ever before. Interdisciplinary approaches and new research disciplines will be needed to analyse the correctness and safety of AI systems, as well as to evaluate their impact on society. Last but not least, the private sector — already employing or only exploring the possibility of introducing AI systems — will need strong support to remain compliant. This brief outlines the state of the EU’s AI Act, discusses concerns within Europe, examines the position taken by the Estonian technology sector and government, and explores the future direction the regulation might take.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Regulation, Legislation, Artificial Intelligence, Private Sector, and European Commission
Political Geography:
Europe and Estonia

40. Russia’s War in Ukraine: Artificial Intelligence in Defence of Ukraine

Author:
Vitaliy Goncharuk
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Russia’s full-scale war in Ukraine is the first international conflict in which the opposing sides have actively developed and used artificial intelligence (AI) for military purposes. AI solutions for geospatial intelligence, operations with unmanned systems, military training, and cyber warfare have been key to success on the battlefield. This brief explores the state of defence AI in Ukraine and highlights the main lessons that can be learned from the Ukrainian experience.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine