Mark Cuban's Mark Cuban recent warning about the AI spending race, highlighting that only one company will ultimately win, resonates deeply with concerns I've expressed before. He points to giants like Perplexity, OpenAI, and Google locked in this fierce competition, and I can't help but reflect on the broader implications for our world AI spending race: Mark Cuban warns Perplexity, OpenAI, Google; only one will win.
This notion of a singular victor in such a critical technological domain is precisely the kind of outcome I've cautioned against. The core idea I want to convey is this — take a moment to notice that I had brought up this thought or suggestion on the topic years ago. I had already predicted this outcome or challenge, and I had even proposed a solution at the time. Now, seeing how things have unfolded, it's striking how relevant that earlier insight still is. Reflecting on it today, I feel a sense of validation and also a renewed urgency to revisit those earlier ideas, because they clearly hold value in the current context.
In my blog, "Equal is exception, unequal is ubiquitous", I delved into the inherent inequalities in natural and societal distributions, asking whether Artificial Intelligence could change this. I discussed how political and economic systems have historically failed to significantly reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, and then pondered AI's role. My concern was, and remains, that if AI's benefits are not universally accessible, it could very well exacerbate existing disparities. This echoes the sentiment behind Cuban's warning – if only one wins, what happens to everyone else?
I vividly recall my discussions with ChatGPT on the concentration of GenAI patents, largely cornered by a handful of companies, primarily from China and the USA. This centralization of power, as I highlighted, could easily lead to an undesirable monopolization of this transformative technology. I even suggested then that the UN Charter should be modified to oblige these companies to share their GenAI with all member countries, treating it like 'air' – a freely available, essential resource for all humanity. My view was, and remains, that GenAI must be treated as a public good, not a commodity to be hoarded or won by a single entity.
While competition can drive innovation, the prospect of an 'AI race' with a single winner is alarming. It suggests a future where the immense capabilities of AI might be controlled by a very few, further entrenching inequalities rather than bridging them. The benefits of AI – in healthcare, education, economic productivity – must be distributed broadly for true progress. We cannot afford to let this vital technology become another mechanism for concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a select few. The time to ensure equitable access and governance of AI is now, before the race is irrevocably won.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Of course, if you wish, you can debate this topic with my Virtual Avatar at : hemenparekh.ai
No comments:
Post a Comment