National AI Capital - Definition 2.0
October 25, 2020 - Countries – prepare to be evaluated!
Initial Global Survey on the topic of National AI Capital was conducted on more than 200 AI experts from 56 countries on all of the continents. The concept was confirmed and validated as very meaningful and useful, and many other interesting data was gathered. Some details you can find in already published reports:
Part 1: NAIC Part 1 of Initial Global Survey: How important is the concept of National AI Capital?
Part 3: NAIC Part 3 (IGS): Future of AI investments and their consequences?
As suggested, we created 3 types of NAIC definition – one very short and useful for practical and everyday communication, second (full) – with more details and nuances, that are important for understanding it completely and future research, and third (elaborated) – providing overall context and broader explanation of different segments.
1. NAIC Definition Short
The capacity of a country to develop and apply AI, and deal with the challenges of AI in order to increase social and economic competitiveness.
2. NAIC Definition Full
The capacity of a country to ethically develop and apply AI, and cope with challenges and opportunities of various AI matters and its transformational impact, in order to increase the country's/citizens' social and economic well-being and national competitiveness in a sustainable manner.
3. NAIC Definition Elaborated:
National AI Capital as is currently defined, is comprised of 3 core factors/parts.
The first factor is the capacity to perform in developing AI tools, implementing them whether created by them or the others and manage a broad and unpredictable range of incoming challenges and opportunities in the AI field. The general aspiration is to build capacity to manage its transformational potential and impact.
The second part is the areas where the consequences and the goals of implementation of high or low-level activities should be visible. It should affect the general well-being and quality of life of its citizens. It should improve the economic position of the country, and increase the overall competitiveness and help societies to become more equal. As a final consequence, it should boost the creative potentials and evolution of humankind.
The third part is about the context in which it happens. In general, nations should follow high ethical standards, aiming at transparency and explainability, avoiding biases, and achieving maximum fairness. It should be human-centered and have an impact on common people and their equality, and high adoption on all levels. Good AI governance should ensure exchange and sharing of knowledge for solving global problems and secure the resources in strategic segments where economic/market forces are not available.
We are glad to be recognized as a part of the Croatian AI Landscape.
CRO AI Landscape
In the last part of the report, we will complete all segments of the methodology that is going to be used in the research.
COOPERATION: For the second phase we will enlarge the number of academic institutions, AI/tech associations, companies that are willing to sponsor/participate and contribute media who will become partners will get new data and articles first.
If you are interested in collaboration, in any of those segments — contact me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Donations
If you want to support this project further and share your enthusiasm, feel free to donate symbolic amounts of Ethereum (ETH) to this address: 0x29e574B5A65e1d7De2B177b53996A26A6729514F
To learn more about this topic, please check Aco's profile on Medium.com.
For the latest travel info, bookmark our main travel info article, which is updated daily.
Read the Croatian Travel Update in your language - now available in 24 languages.
NAIC Part 3 (IGS): Future of AI Investments and Their Consequences?
October 5, 2020 - Part 3 of Aco Momcilovic's National AI Capital Global Survey.
Difference between where the money is invested and where it should be
The expectation is that most of the AI development will come from the Corporations, and the least from the Governments of different countries, according to the //medium.com/@acomomcilovic/naic-part-2-of-initial-global-survey-will-uneven-development-of-ai-a-cause-even-bigger-chasm-916afdfcc265">second NAIC Report. We discussed the dangers of the development of AI projects by only one stakeholder, and this report we will consider those potential consequences even deeper.
In this third part of NAIC IGS, we will answer the questions about areas of AI that are getting most of the investments currently, and about desires and estimates in which areas we should invest in the future, and to do it as fast as possible.
In general, it is clear that investments in AI are growing almost exponentially on the world level. Data is very clear in the leading countries responsible for AI development, as we can see in the example of the USA. And that exponential growth will continue in the next years.
The first question in this segment was — Where will countries invest the most of their resources, and in the shortest period of time?
We got the following answers: Top areas predicted to get investments are — Healthcare, Security, and Finance. The least invested segment is in the area of Education.
This observation was made on observed facts from experts in different countries. The list of area could be longer or structured differently, but this gets a general notion.
Many of those investments are in the Start-ups, who are also getting more and more funding. Many of them are created — based on the information about investment areas that are popular.
The second question was about where SHOULD countries invest, and in their opinion what are the strategic areas that should be taken care of.
And results are the following: Healthcare is still the first, followed by Education and Security. Marketing is in the last position.
If we consider the investments on the dimension that has Impact on Society on one side and Generation Profit on the other side, it sounds reasonable that countries should be at least a bit on the Impacting Society side. So far, it is obvious that most investments are made in the areas that could generate profit fastest. Even healthcare as an industry that is privatized in many countries could be estimated to have a central position on the mentioned axis. Finance, Business Intelligence, Customer Experience, and Marketing are all mostly profit-driven areas. Security also, depending on the country, could be a strategic area close to Impact the Society, but can be also very close to the Generation Profit side, depending on the number of private contractors.
It is interesting to compare segments of Education and Marketing. According to other researches, Education is at the moment underfunded. Is it because it needs a longer period to show results, or some other factors are influencing it, is the question. Also, the area of Marketing is considered to be the last one that countries should invest in.
It is compared in this table:
Education obviously is one very important segment of AI development, that can create an enormous amount of added value, as I wrote in my article about //medium.com/@acomomcilovic/ai-education-system-what-can-we-expect-and-hope-for-in-croatia-e8491aa6716e">AI Education Systems.
The education segment has also some other issues — like low adoption at the moment — sharing 10th place with Healthcare.
But even more important question for all working in the AI field, and those who will reap the consequences of AI development, is who will invest in the future, and based on what priorities, values, and criteria. At the moment, corporations are leading the game, and start-ups are trying to join the race. Governments and State level actors are still a bit sleeping in this extremely important area. And that could have significant long-term consequences.
A new company that has supported the NAIC Global Survey is Blackchain.
In this part, we discussed differences between where the money is invested today, and where should it be in the future. In the next part we will discuss the details of the NAIC definition and methodology.
COOPERATION: For the second phase we will enlarge the number of
academic institutions,
AI/tech associations,
companies that are willing to sponsor/participate and contribute
media who will become partners will get new data and articles first
If you are interested in collaboration, in any of those segments — contact me on
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Donations
If you want to support further this project and share your enthusiasm, be free to donate symbolic amounts of Ethereum (ETH) to this address: 0x29e574B5A65e1d7De2B177b53996A26A6729514F
To read more from Aco and the rest in this series, click here.
NAIC Part 2 of Initial Global Survey: Will (Uneven) Development of AI a Cause Even Bigger Chasm Between Countries?
September 22, 2020 - Are we destined to become trained monkeys at best, if our countries don’t react on time respond to the upcoming AI tide? The initial Global Survey about the concept of National AI Capital — proved that majority of AI experts believe it is very important to measure, and that it should be monitored, as visible in the first part of NAIC IS Global SurveyNAIC IS Global Survey. It is clear that countries that are already differentiating based on their human capital, and technology adoption, could have drastically bigger differences in the future. But, how far is that future? And who can influence it in a positive way?
When to expect it, and who is involved?
In this second part of NAIC IGS, we will try to give some answers, and to discuss their consequences.
One of the questions in the survey, that got responses from 56 countries, was: Will countries differ in their AI capital (and more importantly when)? Only 5% of responders thought there will be no differences between countries, in opposition to 87% of those who thought that significant differences will be present. And, even more, important is the time frame in which that will happen. Exactly half (50%) of AI experts expected that those differences will happen in the mid-term period — let's estimate it in 5 to 10 years. Even more interesting data is that more than one third — 37% of them, except that it will happen in a SHORT period of time — usually estimated as less than 5 years. That is very valuable insight to all those policymakers who are adapting to the changes, usually in very slow motion.
Some countries are already warned that they should react on time to remain competitive — as Microsoft warns UK. What is happening to other countries that don’t have any expectations?
The speed of change could be going faster than we experienced so far, thus making it harder to predict. So the second connected question is, who is creating, or even better who will be responsible for the creation of AI capital (products, processes, patents, knowledge, etc.) in the future. And we got very interesting predictions/answers to that question.
The biggest number of responders — 77%, predicts that the largest contribution will come from those who are leading advancements in the AI field today — private companies and corporations. Maybe a bit surprisingly, the general notion all around the world, is that a significant contribution will come from a growing number of AI start-ups — 73%. Another significant contributor could be Universities and Academic institutions — that are chosen by 59% of responders. And as the least probable contributor — responders choose — Government institutions, with only 31%.
In the time when it seems AI is shaped by nine companies (from two countries), we should pause for a second and consider all the consequences of that. As a part of the answer, new AI start-ups are emerging and boosted by their speed and agility, and focus, they could disrupt the area. Unless of course, they are not bought by those giants, when the time comes. Universities are a constant and reliable player in the field of any advancement and innovation, but it seems they are also lagging, behind, and changing their leading role to support function in many cases. And, for me, the biggest problem, and for many reasons, unused potential – are government-connected institutions, capable of doing large scale projects. Current experience is that they are 4th player and not too reliable when it comes to the creation and implementation of AI. Knowing historically that most of the major breakthroughs, were achieved as a part of state-funded strategical projects, this definitely raises many concerns. AI will also become the area where power is shifting from the public to the private sector, with all the good and the bad consequences.
In conclusion, the questions mentioned here, open many subtopics. What will be the relationship between Universities, Corporations, and Government? How it will change and influence different aspects of ethics? Is confidence and hope in the power of start-ups (un)realistic, taking under consideration that currently a huge proportion of already risky start-ups, in the AI field, is not succeeding and delivering their promises? What should be the priority of our focus, taking into account that we probably have less time than most of the world would estimate?
In the third part of NAIC IGS, we will discuss data gathered on the areas of AI that are getting investments currently, and where should investments go in the future.
A new institution that has joined the NAIC Project is Visio - Scientific and Technological Institute.
Confirmation of the definition of National AI Capital and its importance was first the phase of the project. In this part, we established a probable timeline of AI development and the sources of its creation. In the second phase, we will work on segments of methodology and refining the concept.
COOPERATION: For the second phase we will enlarge the number of
academic institutions,
AI/tech associations,
companies that are willing to sponsor/participate and contribute
media who will become partners will get new data and articles first
If you are interested in collaboration, in any of those segments – contact me on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Donations
If you want to support further this project and share your enthusiasm, be free to donate symbolic amounts of Ethereum (ETH) to this address: 0x29e574B5A65e1d7De2B177b53996A26A6729514F
