The call for global dialogue that meaningfully addresses the rapid rise and development of artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly critical, particularly as AI falls into the vernacular definition of an oxymoronic concept, says a noted academic and expert on the subject.
Speaking at a University of Macao (UM) lecture series on Wednesday afternoon, Professor Rostam J. Neuwirth underscored the importance of using language to bridge ideas and find adequate laws for making sound decisions that protected the public’s interests, particularly as this overlaps when paradoxical ideas are becoming more frequent.
The head of the Department of Global Legal Studies at the UM Faculty of Law believes that through language, one can navigate contradictory ideologies, allowing individuals to enrich their own practical intelligence and sharpen their cognitive abilities for more effective communication and analysis.
“Our intelligence is a human privilege,” Neuwirth told an audience of students and faculty at the start of his lecture. He emphasized that this skill set will become increasingly vital as the need for meaningful dialogue to address the regulatory challenges of AI grow, especially against a fragmented political backdrop.
[See more: AI oversight still requires human monitoring, Macao business leaders told]
“Although AI exists as a global problem, this also creates a larger opportunity to align our interests,” Neuwirth explained. He added that technology was a human made dilemma that could be remedied through collective alliances, but the endeavour to reach a practical solution is currently stymied. He pointed out that the debate on solving AI stems from those with monetary interests behind the innovation, which may not necessarily align with the public’s interests.
“The global race towards regulating AI should be refocused and instead rephrased as a race towards the global regulation of AI,” Neuwirth remarked, adding that this would take us from being competitors to cooperators.
Recent shifts in public support underscore the difficulty of finding workable solutions. Back in September, California vetoed an AI safety bill which was previously seen as a regulatory bellwether, since it had drawn support from advocacy groups and criticism from Silicon Valley’s largest tech companies, most of whom cited the legislation’s vague language as hindering future AI innovation.
Adapting to the fast-moving technology
In just a few years after publishing The EU Artificial Intelligence Act: Regulating Subliminal AI Systems, a book which contextualises the future regulation of AI as proposed by the European Union, Neuwirth admits his answers to complex questions just a short time ago are now called into doubt, underscoring how quickly the AI technology is permeating through society.
“This is why language is so important,” he says, “because it becomes the medium through which law acts.” Neuwirth notes that the current framework does not necessarily protect us from the very real and well-known disruptions caused by AI, stating that without dialogue, interpretations of regulation are left to the courts, which are less technical.
[See more: DeepSeek is rushing to release its next AI model]
Neuwirth concluded that “since artificial intelligence systems begin in the minds of [humankind], it is in the minds of [humankind] that defences of human intelligence must be constructed.” He believes that at the current juncture, dialogue must take precedence at the forefront of the current AI governance debate, underscoring the need to reach a common language that prepares society for the uncommon problems it may soon face with artificial intelligence.
