Last year, Bletchley Park in Britain was abuzz as prominent leaders, industry titans, and renowned academia convened for the inaugural Global AI Safety Summit. The aim was to formulate a consensus on the governance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) - a technology they hypothesized could pose a daunting threat to humanity.

Bigwigs such as Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, were present, rubbing shoulders with others holding critical views of their work. In a significant diplomatic move, nations such as China, the United States, and others, co-signed the "Bletchley Declaration," demonstrating a uniform will to collaborate despite rising geopolitical tensions.

Just six months later, the world is watching closely as the second AI Safety Summit unfolds - primarily taking place virtually this time, co-orchestrated by Britain and South Korea. With the initial enthusiasm over AI’s limitless potential giving way to challenging queries over its tangible limitations, the stage is set for a profound debate.

Martha Bennett, a senior analyst at research and advisory firm Forrester observed, "There are some radically different approaches...it will be difficult to move beyond what was agreed at Bletchley Park." The reference was to the historic yet necessarily broad scope of the previous summit's agreement on AI safety.

In addition to this, contentious matters such as the use of copyrighted materials, paucity of necessary data, and AI’s environmental footprint are anticipated to be substantial discussion topics, potentially deterring illustrious attendees. Despite attempts to market an event similar in scale to Bletchley, a considerable number of its prime attendees have declined the invitations to Seoul.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak had announced at the conclusion of the first summit that these meetings would be held biannually. This was to ensure that governments could maintain oversight on the fast-paced development of this technology. In the interim, the narrative has shifted from the existential threat it could pose to humanity, to the resources required to fuel AI’s evolution such as vast data and electricity supplies.

According to Francine Bennett, the interim director of the Ada Lovelace Institute, "The policy discourse around AI has expanded to include other important concerns, such as market concentration and environmental impacts." Adding to this, OpenAI CEO, Altman, implied that the future of AI is contingent on an energy breakthrough.

Nevertheless, experts forewarn that relying entirely on scientific breakthroughs and robust financial manoeuvres may not be a prudent move. Critics argue that AI’s future may not mirror its hype. As Professor Jack Stilgoe, an expert in technology policy at University College London, put it, “People will find surprising and creative uses for this technology, but that doesn’t mean the future is going to look how Elon Musk or Sam Altman imagine it.”

Looking to May 21-22, the South Korea summit has been termed a "mini-summit," setting the stage for the next major in-person gathering in Paris. Despite this, anticipation is low for a strong turnout of leaders and ministers. Reasons for this range from scheduling conflicts to focusing on future summits, however, all eyes remain firmly trained on the developments in Seoul.

‍