Can middle powers break the global deadlock on AI safety?

Declarations at summits are not enough. The world needs action

- CATHERINE THORBECKE is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia tech.

Last week's AI Impact Summit ended the way these gatherings routinely do.

This time with a 'New Delhi Declaration,' a nonbinding hymn to cooperation and the hope that “AI could be made to serve humanity.” It’s the sort of empty language that dozens of countries and international organizations can sign up to without changing a thing.

The most revealing statement came from the industry. Hours before the declaration, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman offered a bit of moral arithmetic in an interview with the Indian Express. “People talk about how much energy it takes to train an AI model,” he said, “but it also takes a lot of energy to train a human. It takes, like, 20 years of life, and all of the food you eat during that time before you get smart.” Altman likely meant it as a quip. It landed, however, as a sobering reminder that the people steering the AI race are starting to talk about raising children the way they talk about training machines. So much for human-centred AI.

New Delhi should have been a turning point for middle powers, from India and Brazil to Canada. Instead, it showcased the deadlock that has come to define global AI governance. AI superpowers won't meaningfully restrain themselves, AI companies won't elect to slow down and everyone else is signing empty statements while being propelled by a fear of missing out.