2024 #AI4Good Highlights - We've got some work to do!

Ok, so here's a quick highlight reel of the United Nations , AI for Good Global Summit in Geneva last week. In addition to the selected highlights below, Scott Rosenkrans and I recorded 2 live Fundraising.AI podcasts while in Geneva so stay tuned for those to drop on/around June 10.

Needless to say, given the time and expense to attend live, we had high hopes expectations for this Summit.  Geneva did  not disappoint. Cutting to the chase, while the Summit was a bit different than we expected, Scott and I plan to attend again next year.  Want to come with us? 

In no particular order, here's my biggest takeaways:

High quality content:

The goal of A4Good is to IDENTIFY practical applications of AI, ACCELERATE progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals and SCALE solutions for global impact. To this end, the Summit attracts the top-of-the-top talent in terms of attendees and speakers.  There wasn't a single presentation that I felt was a dud.  Given the global reach and access to the foremost thought leaders in AI, the quality of programing was top-notch.

Far too little representation from the NGO/nonprofit sector: 

While this wasn't a fundraising conference per-se, I expected broad(er) representation from the NGO/nonprofit sector given the orientation of our sector that exists/strives to reduce inequity.  After all, the SDGs are created to reduce/remove inequities. Sadly (IMHO), only 7% of the conference attendees were from the NGO community which is reason #1 of why I plan to attend annually.  Our sector needs more representation at the intersection of programs and policy.  From a fundraising lens, as the saying goes, "no money, no mission", I would have expected there would be a bit more fundraising/resource development representation as this is the area that afford orgs to move missions forward. Take away... let's change this dynamic next year!

Diverse, high caliber in-person audience:

While the app and website have little to be desired (slow and glitchy), the event overall was created to provide lots of thoughtful content with a balance of networking opportunities. It did not disappoint. The Summit attracted the best in the field from all corners of the globe. One of the highlights was riding a tram and striking organic conversations with attendees (signified by their badges) with people from Belgium to the Bahamas.

Small and personal:

While 36,000 attend online, there were only a few thousand in person.  This afforded for a more intimate opportunity for IRL connection.  It was great to be in a place where everyone came to learn and grow - together. The was not a lot of formality, and even in the VIP sessions with top dignitaries, everyone was encouraged to participate.

AI Governance efforts are nascent and diffused: 

This is the first year the Summit hosted a full "Day-Zero" Governance day with just a few hundred of the top leaders in AI governance.  Sitting next to top dignitaries, regulators, standards orgs was truly an honor and privilege.  However, my mental summary could be summarized as, "too much talk, and not nearly enough action".   Efforts around AI are slow to take shape, disparate and diffused which little technical understanding that AI is NOT like other linear technologies, therefore traditional attempts to standardize and regulate AI will not work.

AI is not like linear technologies that evolve slowly over time. AI is an exponential moving target and talking about what's needed to ensure responsible + beneficial AI will take swift and adaptable solutions. Overall I left Day-Zero honored to be a part of the discussion but rather concerned by the lack of progress being made on this front.

On a positive note, I left feeling extremely proud of the thought-leadership AND action that @Fundraising.AI has accomplished over the past 2 years.  We not only had ideas to help steer AI for good, we also took action which has now manifest itself in 100 countries globally by almost 10,000 nonprofit/NGO professionals.  Leaving Geneva I've come to the realization that sector-specific solutions are an essential, immediate and imperative stop-gap needed to promote responsible AI practices within their sector.

We cannot (and must not) wait for governments and/or standards organizations alone to decide if/how they plan to broadly govern or regulate AI.  When (or if) accomplished, I have very little confidence those efforts will reflect the unique nuances of the wholly unique NPO sector. Responsible AI is Everyones Responsibility. We must take that responsibility swiftly and seriously.

For those involved in Fundraising.AI, whether as a follower, advisor or sponsor you should all be VERY proud of the forts taken. We have a long way to go but we're much further ahead than a wide majority of RAI efforts. 

SDGs are a mess (sorry couldn't think of a more PC way to say this):

Only 12% of SDGs are on track to be completed by 2030; using AI can achieve 70% of all targets.  There was a palpable hope that AI could essentially "rescue" the SDGs.  While AI can certainly help, I don't subscribe to this level of optimism as there are some fundamental challenges (read "flaws") in the structure of some of the SDGs themselves.

AI will certainly assist with many of the SDG efforts but I find it unwise to overly rely on technology that is still largely unregulated and still forming shape.  Feels like a cry for help, and frankly a distraction from dealing with some of the more foundational flaws of the SDG structure. We've seen this movie before. Ironically, humans got us into this mess, yet are hoping AI will get us out feels a bit like Wall-e to me.

The risk of creating unintended consequences is well known in the NGO community, as it's the NGO that typically has to work harder to reduce inequities often unintentionally created by private sector entities.  Let's not repeat history but rather deal with the fundamental issues in a strategic and measured way that evaluates short term activities with long term implications, THEN use technology in ways that will yield long term results while mitigating harm and unintended consequences.

Tension between scale and safety is (very) real:

Throughout the Summit there was a healthy and open balance between the arguments, (for and against) the AI arms race and the financial incentives that exist, perpetuate, even necessitate corporate players and big tech's outside role in sharping the future of humanity.

Center to this debate was healthy discussion on "open source" or "closed source" AI between major players including Google, Meta, Wikipedia, OpenAI, Linux (to name a few).  While I like the "philosophy" of open source AI (Fundraising.AI is open-source after-all) , I'm a glass half empty spectator on whether humans will use open-source AI more often to help , versus harm humanity (either intentionally or unintentionally). There's no easy answer to this debate and the arguments for/against are strong on both sides - but in burgeoning grey areas (complicated by the speed at which AI development happens due to the exponential nature of AI training itself) we must take a strategic and measured approach to ensure all AI (open and closed) always places HUMANITY OVER UTILITY.   Hard stop. 

Genuine concerns over run-away AI:

Not surprising based on the focus of the Summit, there was uniform acceptance that AI will change almost all aspects of society with seemingly equal potential to do good, as well as harm.  Two separate (amazing!) interviews by Nick Thompson, CEO of the Atlantic with Sam Altman and Jeffrey Hinton highlighted the very disparate thoughts on whether we should be concerned with the exponential pace of AI development in a world with very little governance or directional guidence.

This is best summed up by a quote from one of the dignitaries, "Used responsibly, AI can bring enormous benefits to people. It's going to transform every corner of our economy. But we will only realize the promise of Al, if we also address the serious risks tht ccd at it raises today."

The desire, need and financial incentives around AI almost always promote scale above safety.  In that reality lives the space where we (yes you) to remember that "responsible AI is everyone's responsibility". (I know, I know.. it's my soapbox - get used to it!)

Favorite sessions:  Tristan Harris presentation was fantastic (per always!), and Aza Raskin presentation on how to map animal language was a pure delight.  Also thoroughly enjoyed interviews with Sam Altman and Jeffrey Hinton.  Another amazing talk was the called "Confront the digital paradox", which highlighted sobering statistics like, “53% of GenZ would rather live without a close friend than their cell phone."

Needless to say. An amazing experience and a professional highlight for me personally. Overall, this was an amazing opportunity to meet some amazing humans working in myriad ways to use, steer or govern AI in ways that will be realized as a net-positive for the future of humanity. We have LOTS of work to do, but I remain a "Hopeful Pessimist" (credit Arthur C. Brooks )in my balanced concern for the future of humanity, but with a unwavering steadfast and hopeful lens that I can do something, but that TOGETHER we can envision any future we're passionate about achieving.

Thanks for reading and for waking up every morning with the desire to leave this planet better than we found it! You are truly my inspiration and the reason I continue to fight the good fight!

That's all for now. Hope to see you there next year!! (I'll buy the fondue!)

#ai #UnitedNations #AIforGood #fundraisingAI