The UK government needs equity stakes in AI firms to truly safeguard its citizens
To ensure AI is scrutinised, the UK government should accept some intervention is needed and take on equity stakes in artificial intelligence firms to shape the future of the technology, writes Simon Neville
The evolution of tech usually goes through three phases. First – someone creates a new piece of kit or technology that changes the way we think and act. It is hailed as revolutionary and, in most cases, makes its founders very rich.
Second – unintended consequences emerge. They start small but soon spiral, with vocal critics imploring firms behind the tech to introduce safeguards whilst lobbying politicians to legislate.
Third – governments and regulators step in with a series of regulations to stem the harm. They typically arrive too late because the tech entrepreneurs, founders and funders have moved on to discover the next big thing.
This pattern stretches back for generations. It is incredible to think it took until 1965 for the government to legislate that all car manufacturers must install seatbelts – decades after the technology to build motorcars first evolved.
More recently, Uber upended the taxi industry with cute wordplay that had big implications for employment and tax laws, before loopholes were shut down. And today, social media companies are finally seeing new rules over online safety and threats to their business models if they don’t step up to protect vulnerable users.
It is with this history that you’d hope lawmakers want to get on the front foot with the next innovation – the rise of artificial intelligence.
On Tuesday, the godfather of AI, Geoffrey Hinton, co-signed a letter stating that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority”. If anyone knows about the unintended consequences from the second phase of technology’s evolution – you would think it is him.
With that in mind, what can politicians do to try and get ahead of the game?
Investors in the technology will continue to focus on the bottom line and the firms developing the systems will talk of “ethical considerations”. Some might have pretty brochures and websites about the importance of ESG and may even hire an ESG expert.
But history shows changes only come when governments step in. So perhaps governments should insert themselves into AI firms at an early stage and take on equity stakes to have a seat at the table to instil some oversight from day one.
Free market thinkers will say there isn’t a place for the state to interfere with the forces of capitalism. They will say it isn’t for governments to pick winners by offering investment for equity stakes in firms during the startup phase.
Governments will happily give tax incentives, create grant schemes and invest indirectly through pots of money that VC funds can tap into but they rarely want to see a piece of the action for themselves, lest they end up with egg on their faces. But they might need to swallow their pride and take a different course when it comes to AI.
Nation states need a seat at the table, to protect the interests of the citizens who will be using AI and seeing the outcomes – both good and bad.They need to put people over profits, ensuring growth but not at the potential cost to society.
The UK government still holds a golden share in a handful of British companies. The premise of these shares is to protect these former state-owned firms from falling into foreign ownership.
It acts as a safeguard, even if merely symbolic, that the company is on the radar of the state, who will – in theory – put the interests of the public above those of the markets, if required.
When the government was forced to step in and take on NatWest during the 2008 financial crisis, its ownership saw a marked change in the way the bank operated – with a heavy slant towards acting ethically. This wasn’t through diktat, but with soft power as those in charge recognised they had a responsibility to the public to act beyond reproach.
If governments around the world want to ensure AI is properly scrutinised and the warning of Hinton and others is heeded, perhaps they need some skin in the game today, instead of turning up long after the party has ended and the tech world has moved on.