RE: national v transnational AI. I agree the future is more compartmentalized than the commercial vendors might prefer. I suspect the end state is something like early EC federation, where transnational AIs dip into national AIs as needed to answer transnational questions. Nations own and monetize the national AIs; the transnational vendors own and monetize the transnational--and possibly provide services for monetizing the national AIs.
In addition to the political-economic forces pushing toward such an outcome (how can the EU not federate?), from an engineering perspective one would expect this to improve results over either the national or transnational approach alone. MSGoogleMetaInc. would be fools not to anticipate and build the infrastructure for such, and compete to provide that infrastructure to the national AI builders
G7 attempts to regulate efforts to build military AIs in other nations are going to be interesting to watch. Nations will surely keep military and other 'sensitive' data out of the federation or in siloed federations of their own (e.g., NATO), but there are powerful incentives for most nations to play, to varying degrees and with varying constraints, for commercial and social purposes. Note that federation gives nations wanting to clamp down a built-in choke-point by means of which to meter domestic and international interactions to conform to their preferences ("information mercantilism"). Most will see that as a feature, not a bug.
We might fall short and end up with two or three competing federations reflecting geopolitical alignments, but for at least some purposes, until and unless diplomatic and trading relationships break down completely (and perhaps even then), the federation is likely to be global. I could see many possible twists and turns along the way, and predicting intermediate states and sequences will be very tricky, but a final outcome looking something like this, 15-25 years from now, is where I'd put my money.
Side-note: the biggest threat to the national-AI scenario may be sub-national and ideological AI. Once fragmentation starts, it's hard to stop. There are currently US state governors and their parties, as well as political parties in almost every nation, who would be excited at the possibilities for thought control inherent in subnational AI. Ideologically, just imagine what a transnational FoxAI could do to strengthen political biases and bubbles, domestically and transnationally. #confirmationbAIas
As with all AI it depends on compute energy & chips > continuous real time data input > proven statistical training algos > expert human tags > cybernetic prompting in accordance with ultimate hierarchical decision makers. Current war theatres are being used for mass historical/contemporary/relevant data, but DoD et al Acronym had thought their algos were already ahead of the game, ready for the win (same with Covid theatre and now Cancer etc) but this has not proven out in reality.
Will more #DataDataData and scaling of server farms prove all that is needed? If so extrapolating via financial timelines, giving OpenAI lightbulbs a simple and conclusive $X trillion solution, might do the trick if chip factories can be slammed up fast enough, which is in itself problematic (Taiwan threats, supply chain bottlenecks, sanction war etc). Nvidia is certainly making headway:
However, whole new architectures of both industry hardware and software are now in competition and thus VCs are taking over the field beyond DARPA and QIntel. The 'smart money' that went into AI surveillance/censorship control grids and fintech in general (currently surfacing in the central banking and associated TBTF networks) is jumping onto the AI War bandwagon asap. Looking at past rapid ramps of new technology with focused funding and contracts generating storms of competition, the goal of 2030 for NATO vs RUCNIR AI directed hybrid warfare -- including space battles -- may be within reach. Personally, I see a mind-boggling era of AI failure emerging from this decade. Along with magnitudinous mass destruction beyond what we have recently been witness to.
Here's a list of companies that are catching the AI battlefront wave:
RE: national v transnational AI. I agree the future is more compartmentalized than the commercial vendors might prefer. I suspect the end state is something like early EC federation, where transnational AIs dip into national AIs as needed to answer transnational questions. Nations own and monetize the national AIs; the transnational vendors own and monetize the transnational--and possibly provide services for monetizing the national AIs.
In addition to the political-economic forces pushing toward such an outcome (how can the EU not federate?), from an engineering perspective one would expect this to improve results over either the national or transnational approach alone. MSGoogleMetaInc. would be fools not to anticipate and build the infrastructure for such, and compete to provide that infrastructure to the national AI builders
G7 attempts to regulate efforts to build military AIs in other nations are going to be interesting to watch. Nations will surely keep military and other 'sensitive' data out of the federation or in siloed federations of their own (e.g., NATO), but there are powerful incentives for most nations to play, to varying degrees and with varying constraints, for commercial and social purposes. Note that federation gives nations wanting to clamp down a built-in choke-point by means of which to meter domestic and international interactions to conform to their preferences ("information mercantilism"). Most will see that as a feature, not a bug.
We might fall short and end up with two or three competing federations reflecting geopolitical alignments, but for at least some purposes, until and unless diplomatic and trading relationships break down completely (and perhaps even then), the federation is likely to be global. I could see many possible twists and turns along the way, and predicting intermediate states and sequences will be very tricky, but a final outcome looking something like this, 15-25 years from now, is where I'd put my money.
Side-note: the biggest threat to the national-AI scenario may be sub-national and ideological AI. Once fragmentation starts, it's hard to stop. There are currently US state governors and their parties, as well as political parties in almost every nation, who would be excited at the possibilities for thought control inherent in subnational AI. Ideologically, just imagine what a transnational FoxAI could do to strengthen political biases and bubbles, domestically and transnationally. #confirmationbAIas
So: My virtually sovereign god-intelligence will beat yours any day now.
Take Ukraine for starters.
Global hybrid war, however, requires $7 Trillion just to play at the high-stakes table this decade.
How long until we get such workable intelligences?
As with all AI it depends on compute energy & chips > continuous real time data input > proven statistical training algos > expert human tags > cybernetic prompting in accordance with ultimate hierarchical decision makers. Current war theatres are being used for mass historical/contemporary/relevant data, but DoD et al Acronym had thought their algos were already ahead of the game, ready for the win (same with Covid theatre and now Cancer etc) but this has not proven out in reality.
Will more #DataDataData and scaling of server farms prove all that is needed? If so extrapolating via financial timelines, giving OpenAI lightbulbs a simple and conclusive $X trillion solution, might do the trick if chip factories can be slammed up fast enough, which is in itself problematic (Taiwan threats, supply chain bottlenecks, sanction war etc). Nvidia is certainly making headway:
https://aisupremacy.substack.com/p/nvidias-woodstock-of-ai-conference
However, whole new architectures of both industry hardware and software are now in competition and thus VCs are taking over the field beyond DARPA and QIntel. The 'smart money' that went into AI surveillance/censorship control grids and fintech in general (currently surfacing in the central banking and associated TBTF networks) is jumping onto the AI War bandwagon asap. Looking at past rapid ramps of new technology with focused funding and contracts generating storms of competition, the goal of 2030 for NATO vs RUCNIR AI directed hybrid warfare -- including space battles -- may be within reach. Personally, I see a mind-boggling era of AI failure emerging from this decade. Along with magnitudinous mass destruction beyond what we have recently been witness to.
Here's a list of companies that are catching the AI battlefront wave:
https://www.shanley.com/blog/index-of-61-weapons-startups
Thank you, Sifu.
This sounds like a shambles, some powerful ideas bogged down in infrastructure, politics, investment dollars sloshing.
"a mind-boggling era of AI failure" - may I borrow this, to map out one scenario?
No worries, Bryan. Cheers ;)