Jacinda Ardern Instagram – Put a few thoughts to paper for the Washington Post on AI and what we learned from convening the Christchurch Call. Text below if you’re interested!
——-
Several months ago, I retired from politics. After five years leading a small but incredible country, I knew it was time for someone else to take the reins. My plan to step back from the fray has been disrupted, though, because of two words. Artificial intelligence.

Like so many, I have been following the escalating development of AI and its promise of huge benefits for humanity — ranging from improved productivity to advances in medical science. But I have also been following the risks. The core technology that enables an AI assistant to describe an image to a vision-impaired person is the same technology that might enable disinformation campaigns — and this is the tip of the iceberg. 
My interest in learning is matched by my drive to find answers. I want to know the destination for these tools and what they will mean for democracy and humanity. If these are also the answers you’re searching for, I can tell you that you won’t find them — not yet. It’s difficult to know the path we’re on when advocates tell us “everything is fine,” while others warn that AI might be the end of humanity. 
It’s no wonder leaders in government, industry, civil society and academia, as well as people generally, are looking for their own ways to manage generative AI. Last month alone, leaders from every corner of Big Tech — OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Microsoft’s Brad Smith, Google’s Sundar Pichai — have presented various blueprints for governing AI.

There is no shortage of calls for AI guardrails — but no one seems able to tell us exactly how to build them.
I’m no AI expert. I’m not here to argue the finer details of what oversight should include. But I have strong views on how oversight is developed, and they come from bitter experience. (link for remainder of op-ed in bio and comments below)