The Jakarta Post
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsThe real warning behind Guterres’ AI alarm
As AI shifts global power into fewer hands, nations like Indonesia face a stark choice: build sovereign capability and shape the technology's direction, or become mere consumers in the next great development divide.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Set as preferred source
A person is silhouetted next to the logo of the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance, in Geneva on July 6, 2026. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called for a global governance system to shape artificial intelligence for the good of humanity, warning against allowing the technology itself to “vibe-code“ our future. (AFP/Fabrice Coffrini)
W
hen United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres addressed the General Assembly this week, one part of his final opening speech as secretary-general deserves more attention than it has received.
He spoke about artificial intelligence.
Not because AI is new. Nor because its risks have suddenly appeared. Guterres himself reminded the Assembly that he had raised the issue back in 2017. What has changed is the speed, scale and, perhaps most importantly, the concentration of power behind the technology.
His central message was actually quite simple: “The danger is not technology. The danger is technology without accountability.”
That distinction matters.
There is a temptation today to talk about AI in extremes. One side sees an almost magical technology that will solve our problems. The other sees machines eventually escaping human control.
Both make good headlines. Neither is particularly useful for public policy.
