Including the above discussion, I have considered the reasons why Japan tends to be passive in AI X-Risk discussions.
Cultural Factors
Culture aiming for coexistence and co-prosperity with AI: Influenced by polytheistic worldviews and AI-friendly anime, there’s an optimistic tendency to view AI as a cooperative entity rather than an adversary, leading to underestimation of risks.
Suppression of risk identification due to “sontaku” (anticipatory obedience) culture: The tendency to refrain from dissent by anticipating superiors’ or organizations’ intentions hinders X-Risk discussions.
Preference for contextual approaches over abstract discussions: Favoring discussions based on specific situations (e.g., setting regulations) makes it difficult to engage in abstract X-Risk discussions (strategic level).
Agile governance: Emphasizing flexibility in responses often leads to delayed measures against long-term X-Risks.
Cognitive and Psychological Factors
Lack of awareness regarding AGI feasibility: Insufficient understanding of AI technology’s progress speed and potential impact.
Psychological barrier to excessively large risks: The enormous scale of X-Risks makes it challenging to perceive them as realistic problems.
International Factors
Language barrier: Access to AI X-Risk discussions is limited as they are primarily conducted in English.
Low expectations: Insufficient presence both technologically and in risk strategy leads to low expectations from the international community.
Including the above discussion, I have considered the reasons why Japan tends to be passive in AI X-Risk discussions.
Cultural Factors
Culture aiming for coexistence and co-prosperity with AI: Influenced by polytheistic worldviews and AI-friendly anime, there’s an optimistic tendency to view AI as a cooperative entity rather than an adversary, leading to underestimation of risks.
Suppression of risk identification due to “sontaku” (anticipatory obedience) culture: The tendency to refrain from dissent by anticipating superiors’ or organizations’ intentions hinders X-Risk discussions.
Preference for contextual approaches over abstract discussions: Favoring discussions based on specific situations (e.g., setting regulations) makes it difficult to engage in abstract X-Risk discussions (strategic level).
Agile governance: Emphasizing flexibility in responses often leads to delayed measures against long-term X-Risks.
Cognitive and Psychological Factors
Lack of awareness regarding AGI feasibility: Insufficient understanding of AI technology’s progress speed and potential impact.
Psychological barrier to excessively large risks: The enormous scale of X-Risks makes it challenging to perceive them as realistic problems.
International Factors
Language barrier: Access to AI X-Risk discussions is limited as they are primarily conducted in English.
Low expectations: Insufficient presence both technologically and in risk strategy leads to low expectations from the international community.