人工智慧治理應該集中化嗎?歷史的設計課堂（Computers and Society）

• 2020 年 1 月 13 日
• 筆記

有效的國際人工智慧治理還會是碎片化的嗎?還是需要一個集中化的國際人工智慧組織?我們借鑒了其他國際制度的歷史，以確定在集中人工智慧治理方面的優勢和劣勢。還有一些考慮因素，如效率和政治權力，它們都支援集中化。相反，創建一個緩慢而脆弱的機構的風險，以及在創建嚴格規則的同時確保參與的難度，都對其不利。其它考慮因素取決於中央機構的具體設計。一個設計良好的機構可能能夠阻止挑選法院，並確保政策協調。然而，挑選法院可能是有益的，機構的碎片化格局可能是自組織的。集中化需要權衡利弊，細節很重要。最後，我們提出兩項核心建議。首先，結果將取決於中央機構的準確設計。一個精心設計、涵蓋一系列連貫問題的中央集權制度可能是有益的。但是，封閉一個不完善的結構可能會導致比分裂更糟糕的命運。其次，就目前而言，碎片化可能會持續下去。應該密切監控這一點，看看它是自組織的，還是僅僅是不充分的。

原文標題：Computers and Society：Should Artificial Intelligence Governance be Centralised? Design Lessons from History

原文：Can effective international governance for artificial intelligence remain fragmented, or is there a need for a centralised international organisation for AI? We draw on the history of other international regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak in favour of centralisation. Conversely, the risk of creating a slow and brittle institution speaks against it, as does the difficulty in securing participation while creating stringent rules. Other considerations depend on the specific design of a centralised institution. A well-designed body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial and a fragmented landscape of institutions can be self-organising. Centralisation entails trade-offs and the details matter. We conclude with two core recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well-designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking-in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, for now fragmentation will likely persist. This should be closely monitored to see if it is self-organising or simply inadequate.

原文作者：Peter Cihon,Matthijs M. Maas,Luke Kemp

原文鏈接：https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.03573