Governance of technology can be best understood as a systematic way of modelling the future we desire for tech by applying best practices and policy, with accountability, transparency and continuous reasoning (public debate) about best options, trade-offs and ethical constraints. Making it a continuous retro-alimentative process.

As it may compound into some kind of network of governance hubs distributed through organizations from all sectors, we can easily see it as a rational and secure road to ensure some global level of technology governance, connecting local actions to global frameworks oriented by a global view. As society becomes to start some type of “planetary level civilization” with the creation of the internet, as say famous scientist Michio Kaku.

Being this type of planetary level civilization we must think about it in all its layers of interconnections and technology is the one of the central players on this play. We can easily check it on the appealing narrative that follow us as society for years and years. I am talking about the both and always present kind of contradictory tendency of technology. One more techno-phobic the other techno-philic.

We can see the pattern through history. Its always about choosing the path and its consequences. Tech has always the potential to destroy and build, sometimes at the same time. Just remember nuclear power for one sec. Right?! Our role, as humans, technology creators, is to be able not only to create, but also to govern its creation and deployment into society the best way possible.

What is the best way possible? All (or only) what is beneficial to its creators and its environment, humans and earth. Its a proper mix of responsibility and good vision. Tech is a collective enterprise. We are (re)creating it everyday, since day one, which makes it intrinsically connected with the culture of our civilization.

We can go further and even say that technology is, per se, society itself. Being it one of the faces (perspective) of the general prism of Human Life. This one that we create artificially to enhance the organic one, solving problems originated by our social actions (economics, production, health, education, so on). If we are not enhancing what is already here, we are probably heading a not desirable path of development as a species.

If the internet is our first planetary level technology, artificial intelligence may be our second one. Thus, its at least reasonable the noise around GPT technology and alike. For sure, all that we’ve said until here applies to AI and stopping researches may not be truly the best way, we don’t really know. However, we sure need a factible way of organize AI development oriented by desirable outcomes and ethical principles holding its process accountable.

The Unescos’ recommentations on AI Ethics is a giant effort towards some global-oriented framework we were imagining in the start of the article. The framework for humanity-driven technology development, focused on AI.

It is possible that we will be not be able to reach a “one-size-fits-all” type framework for AI development on global level. Besides Unescos’ recommentations, there are various initiatives and guidelines aimed at promoting the ethical and responsible development and deployment of AI technologies.

One notable initiative is the "AI for Good" movement, which aims to leverage AI addressing some of the world's most critical challenges: poverty, hunger, climate change and others. Another spot on initiative is the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI), which is a collaboration between leading AI countries aimed at fostering the development of AI in a manner that is consistent with shared values and ethical principles.

Several other organizations, such as the IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems and the AI Ethics Lab, have developed ethical guidelines and frameworks for AI development, emphasizing the importance of transparency, accountability, and human-centric values in the design and deployment of AI systems.

From the governments and regulatory bodies, some have already developed policies and regulations aimed at promoting the responsible development and use of AI. For example, the European Union has developed a framework for trustworthy AI, while countries such as the United States, Canada, and Australia have established national AI strategies. Brazil is not behind and also has established its AI strategy by 2021 through the EBIA.

Overall, as a one-size-fits-all global framework for AI development may be not even desirable, given contextual and cultural differences, the various initiatives, guidelines, and policies aimed at promoting ethical and responsible AI development and deployment are already in motion. So, as we can see, we can already map globally where it is flourishing and what is the players, factors and initiatives already compounding the network of technology governance focused on AI. We still have a lot of work to do, as we are experiencing the early days of AI. And what is already in motion denotes an exciting future made out of ethical technological advancements on our global and local solutions.