U.N. Report Warns AI May Increase Global Tech Inequality

>>> SO NOW TO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WHICH, AS YOU KNOW, IS THE NEXT FRONTIER OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL REVOLUTION.

AS IT CONTINUES TO EVOLVE AT BREAKNECK SPEED, HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE IT IS SAFE, ETHICAL AND ACCESSIBLE FOR ALL TO USE?

TO ANSWER THIS, WE SPOKE WITH THE CO-CHAIR OF THE U.N.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY.

>> THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

YOU ARE CO-CHAIR OF THIS U.N. AI ADVISORY BOARD.

YOU'VE PUBLISHED THIS FINAL REPORT.

WHAT'S THE TOP LINE?

WHAT ARE THE FINDINGS THAT YOU ARE MOST INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF?

>> FIRST OF ALL, WE ARE AWARE OF THE POSSIBILITIES ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS GOING TO BRING FOR HUMANITY, EFFICIENCY, STRETCH PUBLIC HEALTH AND CONDUCT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.

WE ARE ALL AWARE THESE ARE GREAT BUT AT THE SAME TIME THERE ARE A LOT OF RISKS.

IN THE SHORT TERM FUNDAMENTAL VALUES AND LONG TERM IN TERMS OF SAFETY.

WHAT WE NEED TO ENSURE IS ALL THESE OPPORTUNITIES ARE ABSOLUTELY DEVELOPED AND IF WE LEAVE ALL OF THIS TECHNOLOGY, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE OPPORTUNITIES, BUT WE WILL HAVE SOME OF THE PRODUCT WE HAVE TODAY TALKING ABOUT LACK OF INCLUSIVENESS.

>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LACK OF IRN INCLUSIVENESS, THE REPORT POINTS OUT IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS THE GIANT GAPS THERE ARE IN HOW UNEQUAL THE DISTRIBUTION OF WHERE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS TODAY.

SEVEN COUNTRIES ARE PARTY TO ALL THE DIFFERENT KIND OF AI GOVERNANCE EFFORTS THAT ARE HAPPENING AROUND THE PLANET AND 118 COUNTRIES ARE PART OF NONE OF THEM.

SO IS THERE A RISK HERE THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD, MEANING THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD, GETS LEFT BEHIND?

>> YES, IT IS.

I MEAN, IN FACT, THERE IS A GREAT RISK TO INCREASE THE CURRENT DIGITAL DIVIDE WITH A NEW AI DIVIDE.

WE MUST ENSURE THAT THE BENEFITS AND BE RISKS OF ANY GENERATION IS SHARED.

THE REALITY IS THERE ARE A LOT OF IMPORTANT INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS IN TERMS OF ETHICS GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS IN SOME PARTS OF THE WORLD.

WE CANNOT LEAVE ALL OF THE COUNTRIES WITHOUT BEING PART, NOT EVEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT BUT ALSO IN THE DISCUSSION.

WE WANT EQUALITY IN DEVELOPMENTS.

WE NEED TO ENSURE EQUALITY IN THE ACCESS.

TO ENSURE EQUALITY IN THE ACCESS, WE NEED THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE INSTRUMENTS TO MAKE SURE AI IS GOVERNED AT A LEVEL.

ALSO WITH THE LESS DEVELOPED COUNTRIES WITH A RIGHT TO DEVELOP THE SOLUTIONS.

ENTITIES THAT ARE RELATED TO DATA, COMPUTING CAPABILITIES AND TALENT.

THAT IS ONE OF THE PROPOSALS WE HAVE IS ON A CAPACITY OF THE LEG WORK AND BUILDING AND IT'S FUNDED GLOBALLY.

>> SOME OF THIS COMES DOWN TO COMPUTING POWER AND WHERE THAT COMPUTING POWER IS LOCATED.

RIGHT NOW WHAT YOU POINT OUT IS THERE IS ALMOST NO COMPUTING CLUSTER, ALL THE 100 BIGGEST COMPUTES CLUSTERS, ALMOST ALL ARE IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.

TO ENABLE A SMALLER TALENT TO TRY TO BUILD APPLICATIONS ON AI, ET CETERA, JUST DOESN'T EXIST THERE, HOW DO WE EVEN BEGIN THAT?

>> EXACTLY.

THAT'S THE RIGHT QUESTION.

HAVE ACCESS TO THE COMPUTING CAPABILITIES AND IN BUILDING NETWORKS, WE PROPOSE A GLOBAL FUND THAT CAN BE FUNDED BY PRIVATE AND BE PUBLIC ENTITIES AND MONEY IN KIND.

WE NEED TO PROVIDE THE CAPACITIES TO BUILD THEIR OWN ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEMS THAT THEY NEED.

MOST OF THE LARGE LANGUAGE MODEL SYSTEMS THAT ARE BEING DEVELOPED, THEY ARE ONLY DEVELOPED BY DATA.

THEREFORE, WE CANNOT PRETEND THIS IS UNIVERSAL.

>> THERE WAS AN INVESTMENT BETWEEN BLACKROCK AND MICROSOFT AND THEY HAVE NVIDIA AS A PARTNER.

MOST OF THAT IS AMERICA CENTRIC.

I WONDER HOW DOES -- HOW DO THE SUGGESTIONS YOU'RE MAKING HERE, DO YOU PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL SATYA NADELLA AND SAY, HOW ABOUT THOSE DATA CENTERS IN OTHER COUNTRIES?

>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POLITICS.

WHAT IS THE PLACE WHERE ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS HAPPEN?

THE POINT IS WE DON'T HAVE A PLATFORM FOR COLLABORATION, FOR EXAMPLE, ON SAFETY.

SAFETY IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR AI.

DESIGN THE SAFEGUARDS AND GUARDRAILS THAT WE CAN TRUST THE TECHNOLOGY.

THE WE ARE ALL INTERESTED IN GET ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS AND OPPORTUNITIES AND THEREFORE WE CAN ADOPT IT WITH TRUST.

TRUST FOR THE CONSUMERS AND TRUST FOR THE CITIZENS.

WHAT WE ARE NOT SEEING HERE IS GETTING ALL THE ANSWERS TO THE PROBLEMS.

WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE IS WHAT ARE THE INSTRUMENTS THAT ARE NOT YET IN PLACE THAT ARE NECESSARY BECAUSE THEY'RE COVERING IT.

THE OTHER IMPORTANT THING FOR ME, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RECOMMENDATIONS IS THE SCIENTIFIC ONE.

WE NEED TRANSPARENCY ON THE RISKS AND ON THE OPPORTUNITIES.

AND WITHOUT DATA AND SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, NOT EVEN POLICY MAKERS CAN BE IN SENSITIVE ROLES TO GUIDE AI PROPERLY.

>> HOW DO YOU CREATE THAT INCENTIVE FOR TRANSPARENCY?

RIGHT NOW WHEN IT COMES TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN THAT LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS HAVE BEEN TRAINED ON COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL.

IF YOU HAVE THIS RESPONSIBILITY, WHOSE LAW DO YOU AGREE ON?

WHOSE INTELLECTUAL LAW ARE YOU GOING TO GO BY?

WHAT IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN ONE COUNTRY VERSUS ANOTHER?

HOW DO YOU GET THROUGH THOSE KIND OF THORNY ISSUES?

>> I THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES.

ONE IS ETHICS, ONE IS REVELATIONS AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ETHICS, HOW DO COMPANIES AND GOVERNMENTS, HOW SHOULD THEY BEHAVE IN A MORAL, ACCEPTABLE WAY?

THAT'S ETHICS.

BUT THEN IT COMES TO GOVERNANCE.

WHAT ARE THE INSTRUMENTS TO PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THESE COMPANIES AND THE GOVERNMENTS ARE BEHAVING ETHICALLY?

AND REGULATION IS ONE OF THESE BUT IT'S NOT THE ONLY ONE.

I COME FROM EUROPE, I'VE BEEN AN ACTIVE NEGOTIATOR AND WE SOLVE THIS BUT IT DOESN'T WORK FOR EVERYONE.

HERE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GOVERNANCE, IT CAN BE THROUGH REGULATION AND ALSO THROUGH MARKET INCENTIVES.

IT CAN BE WITH OVERSIGHT WORK, TREATIES, MANY OTHER WAYS.

WE ARE PROPOSING SOME INSTRUMENTS TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

IN TERMS OF REGULATION, WE CANNOT EXPECT ALL OF THE COUNTRIES WILL HAVE THE SAME REGULATION.

WHAT WE CAN EXPECT IS A CONVERGENCE ON A VERY IMPORTANT MEDIUM THAT ANYTHING ON AI IS FOR THE COMMON GOOD.

IT'S BASED UNDER THE U.N. CHAPTER, UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND BASED ON HUMAN RIGHTS.

I THINK THAT'S THE BARE MINIMUM WE SHOULD ASK ON ANY COMPANY.

>> YOU ARE FOR OUR AUDIENCE THAT DOESN'T KNOW YOU THE SPANISH SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DIGITIZATION AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

YOU'VE HAD THESE CONVERSATIONS ACROSS EUROPE.

HOW DID YOU BALANCE THE NEED FOR MAKING SURE IT'S COMPREHENSIVE, UNDERSTANDING THE TECHNOLOGY, AND AT THE SAME TIME THE SORT OF NEED FOR SPEED?

BECAUSE SO OFTEN WE FIND, AT LEAST IN THE UNITED STATES, REGULATION IS ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE TO EIGHT YEARS BEHIND WHERE THE TECHNOLOGY IS.

THE BY THE TIME IT GETS LIT AT THIS GATED IN THE COURT SYSTEM, IT'S EVOLVED.

>> THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION.

HOW CAN WE MAKE THESE BEST PRACTICES FUTURE PROOF?

THAT MUST BE EMBEDDED IN THE LAW MECHANISM ITSELF.

IT HAS ITS OWN RENEWABLE MECHANISMS AND A LOT OF THE THINGS I PROPOSED ARE FOR THE INDUSTRY.

WE HAVE ALL THE SAME PRINCIPLE.

ANYTHING WE ARE PROPOSING HERE AS THE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE ARE AGILE INSTRUMENTS THAT CAN EVOLVE.

WHAT WE CANNOT DO IS TO DO NOTHING, TO WAIT UNTIL THE HARM IS DONE, BECAUSE GOVERNANCE MUST NOT BE SEEN AS AN INNOVATOR.

IT MUST BE SEEN AND IF WE GIVE TRUST TO CONSUMERS AND USERS, PEOPLE WHO ADOPT AI MASSIVELY, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SEEING.

I THINK RISKS WITH A LITTLE WEIGHT HAVE MORE YEARS.

I THINK WE ARE AT A TIME TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE SHALL DOING THINGS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

PROBABLY WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GIVE BACK THE POTENTIAL HARM.

>> I LOOKED AT THE REPORT AND THE AMAZING CONFLUENCE OF THE NUMBER OF EXPERTS WHO ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT NEGATIVE AI, TELLING FACT FROM FICTION, THAT'S SOMETHING WE ARE HERE NOW BEFORE AN ELECTION THINKING ABOUT MUCH MORE CLOSELY, I WONDER HOW ARE -- YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT SOME SORT OF BASELINE OF ENSURING A SURVEILLANCE STATE DOESN'T TAKE OVER IN A HARMFUL WAY OR INFORMATION INTEGRITY ISN'T DESTROYED?

>> EXACTLY.

THIS IS WHY WE THINK CONSENSUS.

WE CAN COMPETE FOR MARKET SHARE AND SAFETY.

I THINK NATIONAL COUNTRIES WILL HAVE TO LIMIT THE POWER OF GOVERNANCE OR COMPANIES.

AGAIN IN THE ACT WE PUT FIVE CASES WE CONSIDER USERS OF AI.

WE KNOW WE DON'T PRETEND THROUGH THE U.N. TO REPLACE THE ROLE THAT ALL GOVERNMENT LEADERS NEED TO PUT IN PLACE IN THEIR COUNTRIES.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS?

HOW DO WE PREVENT UNINTENDED MISUSES.

HOW DO WE SET UP GUARDRAILS THAT RISK IN THIS COUNTRY IS A RISK IN OTHER COUNTRIES.

HOW DO WE ALIGN ON TECHNICAL STANDARDS?

HOW DO WE SET UP SCIENTIFIC PANELS?

ALL THESE ARE NOT JUST FEARS WITH NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE BECAUSE WE ARE FOCUSING A LOT ON THE RISK AND WE'RE NOT FOCUSING, THEREFORE, ON THE OPPORTUNITIES.

IT'S HUGE.

I THINK WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT.

COMPANIES, CITIZENS AND GOVERNMENTS, THAT WE USE AI FOR THE GOOD.

I THINK THAT IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

>> EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF AI, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY THAT IS NECESSARY TO POWER SOME OF THE DATA CENTERS WHERE ALL OF THIS COMPUTING POWER WOULD BE WORKING, RIGHT?

HERE WE ARE ON THE ONE HAND IN A CLIMATE CRISIS THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF COST FOR THE WORLD.

ARE WE MAKING THINGS WORSE WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT HOW AI IS DEVELOPING TODAY WITHOUT REALLY ANY ENVIRONMENTAL GUARDRAILS?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT OF AI WITH THE LEVEL OF CONSUMPTION OF ENERGY IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.

BECAUSE WE THINK AI CAN BE VERY POSITIVE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS, WE NEED TO ASK FOR SUSTAINABLE REQUIREMENTS ALSO.

I THINK ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE EXPECT THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL WILL SHED SOME LIGHT IS IN HOW TO DO THAT IN A BETTER WAY, HOW CAN WE BE MORE EFFICIENT SO WE DON'T HAVE THE EXCESSIVE CONSUMPTION WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY LIKE CONTRIBUTORY, USING AI TO BE MORE EFFICIENT.

AT THE SAME TIME THE TECHNOLOGY IS NOT SUSTAINABLE BY ITSELF.

THAT'S THE WAY WE WANT TO GO.

THAT'S THE WAY THE INTERNATIONAL CONSENSUS MUST GO.

>> MOST OF US AS CONSUMERS THINK ABOUT CHATBOTS.

THERE ARE DARKER USES THAT WE ARE SLOWLY UNDERSTANDING.

ONE IS IN THE USE OF AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS.

THIS IS A COMPLETELY DISCRETE CONVERSATION THAT HAS MOSTLY MILITARY STAKEHOLDERS, HEADS OF STATE INVOLVED.

SO I WONDER IF IN THIS KIND OF AN ADVISORY MODEL WHETHER YOU'VE COME UP WITH ANYTHING TO SUGGEST OR ALTER THE COURSE OF HOW AI COULD BE USED IN DEFENSE?

>> WELL, IN THIS PARTICULAR MATTER WE SEE IT, WE DON'T NEED TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT.

WE ALREADY HAVE THE GENEVA CONVENTION.

WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IN THE REPORT IS WE, I WOULD SAY, EXPECT OR CLAIM FOR A TREATY IN 2026 TO BAN THESE ALTERNATIVE WEAPONS.

THIS IS LIKE A PROPOSAL THAT WE DO, REALLY THAT A PLACE THAT THIS IS DISCUSSED IS THE GENEVA CONVENTION.

WE DON'T NEED TO CREATE A DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT.

AI MUST BE FOR THE GOOD OF HUMANITY, WE ALSO CONSIDER THE HARM.

>> WE'VE ALSO ALREADY SEEN HERE IN THE UNITED STATES HORRIBLE CASES WHERE THE MODELS THAT THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WAS TRAINED OFN, ESPECIALLY FOR VISUAL RECOGNITION, CREATES BIASES AND EXACERBATINGBIASES.

SOME OF THAT MIGHT BE CONSCIOUS AND SOME MIGHT BE UNCONSCIOUS.

HOW DO YOU FIGURE OUT ANY KIND OF A CONVERSATION, MUCH LESS A STANDARD, SO COMPANIES IN EUROPE, THE UNITED STATES AND MAYBE CHINA SAY HERE'S WHAT TO AVOID TO MAKE SURE YOUR DATA ON THE RESPONSE AND THE OUTPUT IS BETTER?

>> COMPANIES HAVE CREATED A RESPONSE.

THE SECTOR IS VERY RESPONSIBLE AND WILL DO THINGS BETTER AND WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THESE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE DIALOGUE, WE INCLUDE THE COMPANIES THERE.

WE INCLUDE ACADEMIA, THE COMPANY, THE GOVERNMENT, SOCIETY.

THAT'S WHERE WE NEED -- THAT'S WHERE A CONVERSATION IS NEEDED.

I THINK ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO PROGRESS ON THE TECHNICAL POINT OF VIEW.

IT IS TRUE ALL OF THESE LAWS OF GENERAL PURPOSE ARE GOING TO BE REFINED BY PRIVATE DATA OR SPECIFICALLY USE CASES ON THE INDUSTRIES.

I THINK ONE IS A NORMAL EVOLUTION OF THE PRODUCTS AND THE OTHER IS HOW CAN WE SENSE THE RISK THIS CAN HAVE FOR DISCRIMINATION AND THE RIGHTS AND VALUES.

THAT'S WHERE WE NEED THESE CONVERSATIONS.

PUT TOGETHER THE DEVELOPERS, USERS, POLICY MAKERS AND COME TO THIS CONSENSUS AND STANDARDS.

>> WHAT DO YOU THINK RIGHT NOW IS THE BIGGEST OBSTACLE OF TRYING TO ESTABLISH SOMETHING LIKE THIS, EVEN IF IT'S NOT A HARD AGENCY, EVEN IF THEY'RE SOFTER STEPS THAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING?

WHAT DOES SUCCESS LOOK LIKE IN FIVE YEARS?

>> THE FIRST IMMEDIATE STEP IS TO GAIN THE SUPPORT OF THE MEMBER STATES IN THE VOTING THEY HAVE ON THE GLOBAL DIGITAL COUNCIL THAT WILL TAKE PLACE ON SUNDAY.

THE DISCUSSIONS OF THE COMMON AGENDA ON THE UNITED NATIONS.

THE FIRST THING IS THIS PROPOSAL THAT THE GROUP OF INDIVIDUAL EXPERTS, THE 39 MEMBERS OF OUR BOARD, IT'S MORE THAN 2,000 EXPERTS IN THE WORLD THAT HAVE PARTICIPATED IN DIFFERENT CONSULTATIONS, MORE THAN 70 CONSULTATIONS ALL OVER THE WORLD.

WE ARE QUITE CONFIDENT THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS MAKE SENSE AND THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE GATHERED ABSOLUTELY ALL THE SENSITIVITIES.

SO THE NEXT STEP IS WE REALLY GAINED THE SUPPORT OF THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATION ON THE UNITED NATIONS AND TO PUSH FOR THESE INITIATIVES.

IF EVEN ALL OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT ADOPTED, I THINK WE SHOULD START THE DISCUSSION FROM THE SOCIETY POINT OF VIEW.

WE NEED TO PUT ALL OF THESE CHALLENGES ON THE TABLE AND RECREATE THOSE.

WE EXPECT WE RECREATE A CONVERSATION AROUND THIS.

>> THANKS A LOT FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.