跳至主要內容

To Regulate or Not to Regulate? About AI technology

I borrowed the title of the forum this afternoon. Actually, I attended two webinars about AI today. 

One forum focused on the debate about regulating AI development in Taiwan. The discussion was fruitful, as the panellists shared their experiences and knowledge about different AI regulations across various countries. Besides Taiwan, they discussed the European Union, the US, Korea, and China. Korea, for instance, published their "Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of Trust" (AI Basic Act) at the end of 2024. However, before this, the Korean government had already established good data governance through three essential acts: the Personal Information Protection Act, the Network Promotion Act, and the Credit Information Act. These laws, along with their MyData applications, built a strong foundation for strategies like the Data Dam, a centralized platform for securely collecting, storing, and processing large-scale data, which supports AI development and innovation.

Taiwan published the AI Basic Bill last year. However, concerns remain about increased regulation leading to higher compliance costs and slower technological development. The government hopes to develop a large language model to protect traditional Chinese characters and culture. This effort is led by the National Science and Technology Council and NARLabs, which developed the TAIDE model. One team member mentioned encountering copyright issues during development. Should we enact more regulations, or should exemptions be considered for fostering technological innovation?

Notably, in December 2024, the Italian data protection agency fined OpenAI 15 million euros for breaching regulations. Additionally, OpenAI faces copyright infringement accusations in several countries.

In the last five minutes, there was a brilliant sharing about the algorithm collusion. I'd like to pay more attention to this issue since I know the International Competition Network (ICN) published a document about the responsibility of algorithm collusion price fixing or conspiracy. The lawyer, Mr. Wu tends to support the free market, he believes the market has the mechanism to recover and balance. The government is the invisible hand, when the market is normal, the government should not interfere with the market. That is my notes about Mr. Wu's sharing. I hope future sessions will delve into the algorithm and competition issues, as defining algorithmic conspiracy behaviour is both critical and fascinating.

Personally, I lean toward avoiding excessive regulation at this stage, prioritizing establishing boundaries for protecting human rights and children while lowering compliance costs.

Regarding global perspectives, I am uncertain about the regulatory approaches of different governments. At the AI Summit and AI Global Forum in Korea last May, governments seemed inclined toward strict AI regulation. However, if Trump returns to the presidency, will the US tighten or loosen its control over AI technology development? I remain undecided.


At the Webinar by the DiploFoundation

This may be the first DiploFoundation webinar of 2025. At the end of 2024 and the beginning of 2025, I received numerous forecasts about antitrust and competition trends. However, I am more interested in Internet governance and diplomacy.

About the Global Digital Tax

I heard updates about the latest progress in digital tax discussions. While the OECD has been negotiating with various countries, progress seems slow and potentially fraught with challenges.

About the UN IGF, WSIS+, and GDC

I did not have much time to attend the UN IGF 2024. I only managed to participate in one Policy Network on AI session and one Best Practice Forum on cybersecurity.

Memorizing the WSIS+ and Global Digital Compact (GDC) is challenging, especially since Taiwan has limited participation in these meetings, resulting in a lack of information for its citizens. As a result, I rarely engage in discussions during WSIS+ and GDC sessions.

The AI application in DiploFoundation

The DiploFoundation showed its AI applications at the UN IGF 2024. I saw their AI analysis of conference records and the knowledge graph. People don't need to review the video again, just read the summary and the notes are enough. 

Jovan Kurbalija also shared the new application on the blog at the end of the webinar. After reading his blog post, readers can leave comments in the comment box. The chatbot can simulate the writer and talk to you. That is fascinating and makes a blog more active, not only full of text and static. 

留言

此網誌的熱門文章

愛用Google Talk的七個理由

沒有在幫Google Talk打廣告,只是比起MSN起來,我比較喜歡使用它。比較熟的朋友都知道,我不太愛用IM軟體,因為一直覺得,如果真的忙,何必要在MSN暱稱上掛著忙碌?誰真的關心你有沒有在忙?誰真的關心你心情不好?有的公司為了防止員工把公司機密外洩(老闆是豬頭並不算是機密),也透過網管把這類通訊軟體的port給關掉。 在MSN、Yahoo Messenger很紅的時候,還有不少報章雜誌在稱讚這類即時通訊軟體可以減少溝通時的成本,可以直接和客戶做連繫溝通-可是,有多少人能夠透過「文字」來表達正確的語意?連面對面溝通都能詞不達意了,不是嗎?之後有人靠著畫這些通訊軟體所使用的小圖示發了財,從此一句話裡可能會出現一堆圖案。常常看不懂對方要表達的正確意思是什麼?這樣真的有裝到可愛嗎?正的比較貼近對話者嗎?最討厭的,是那三秒一跳的廣告真是種視覺上的干擾,網頁上不要看的廣告可以用Firefox用ABP擋掉,即時通訊軟體上的廣告好像沒得選擇。 MSN並不是我第一個使用的即時通訊軟體,五專時就開始用ICQ,不過也有很慘的經驗,我的電腦就這麼給人家開了後門。後來在大學時,MSN對我而言是一個工具,因為學校在淡水,不少同學是通勤生,有時候分組報告需要討論時,有的同學接下來還有課,有的同學早就離開學校,大家約一個時間一起上線討論,還算是個不錯的工具,但是,詞不達意是一回事,就算有群組討論,還是另開視窗和別人討論有的沒的事,更別說只要坐在電腦前就受不了網路其他的誘惑,有的人邊打電玩邊討論,有的人邊逛購物網站邊討論,有的人和其他人聊天打屁忘了在討論的主題…一點效率也沒有。悶在辦公室的時候,還準備了兩個MSN帳號,一個上班時用,一個在家裡用,也許我有迫害妄想症,我沒辦法相信辦公室的電腦,只要是「公用」電腦就會讓我疑點重重。 有兩年的時間我都不怎麼開MSN,真的非必要才會開,在 Skype還沒那麼紅的時候也曾裝過,通訊良好,不過那個年代還沒有那麼流行透過即使通訊來傳語音,而且影像和聲音通要傳遞的話,頻寬要夠。 不知不覺,即時通訊軟體已經變成辦公室必要軟體,還是有人堅持不使用IM,我算是被說服了,不過,我選擇了Google Talk,原因如下: 整合到自訂首頁裡 -Google的自訂首頁現是是我開啟瀏覽器後的首頁,在登入後就可以看到自己想要看的訊息,而且現在還可以自訂佈景主題哦!這比起P家亂七八...

2012BioTech(圖多字多)

今年因為工作的關係,所以在生技月的生技展中擔任工作人員。以往生技月裡會去設攤的是另一個計畫,今年則是我所服務的農業科專計畫 [1] 。 小組們為這個計畫忙到翻天覆地好長一段時間,中間還歷經期中審查及新案的收件及審查會的舉行。終於,這些都在幾天內展覽結束了。每個人平均輪值一天到一天半,我和另一位研究人員負責7月26日的開幕並在27日南下到高雄參觀資策會創研所的IDEAS F.A.R.M。 中間會有其他研究人員來輪流,休息時,我便到其他攤位去晃晃。

停不下來的更新

一直更新Blog的版型,我必須承認是一件很無聊的事,不過這次除了版型的更動外,連分類和文章內文也做了變動。 先說分類吧!在Blogger叫做Label,不過,Blogger在分類上有一些bugs,只能使用英文,以前這裡的分類大多都是中文分類,結果在link上就是一堆亂七八糟的亂碼,所以我把它改成英文,同時細分一些項目,把出版的文章和一些教學的文章分開來,雖然已經很久沒寫新的,不過既然放上來就做個分類。然而就在新舊label移轉之後,發現中文的label還會存在,而且還會出現莫名奇妙的幽靈數字,Blogger知道這是個bug,不過似乎一直沒有修復的跡象。所以在分類上就出現了如右圖一般的情況,在英文標籤裡會有文章,但是在中文標籤裡是沒有文章出現的,但奇怪的是,有些中文標籤已經不見了,然而在Beauty-Beta這個部落格裡,我也做了分類上的變動,由於以前用英文開頭的Label,所以在label的變動上倒是不用擔心會有這樣的情況。 再來是文章的內容,把以前的文章重新分類,標題前面的一些全形符號或是分類刪掉,除了一些比較特殊的,我會留著,例如壹陸壹,因為在label裡為了統一,我留著原本的E61,但人家的店名是壹陸壹,所以留下文章標題前面的中文分類,另外像是Entertainment項目裡,可能有音樂,可能有電影,就會在前面留下中文分類。 前簡單的CSS和HTML改成現在的XML,這無疑是讓我們再多學些東西,能有時間鑽研當然是好事,可是轉換後,我一直沒有時間去改,當然多半也是因為懶,到現在也是拿別人做好的版型去改配色而已,所以像裡面的設定、安裝的widget和analytics的javascript都要一個一個重新裝,上個星期幾乎每天都弄到天亮才睡,只為了整理這個blog。也因為之前在blog裡放了technorati的分類,所以還要修改以前的文章,把它們加入technorati,還有裡面的語法要更改,所以這個星期甚至下個星期都會一直收到這裡的更新訊息,對於不斷收到訊息干擾的朋友們,在這裡說聲抱歉。 在版面上因為blogger系統在feed接受上的更新,所以還有四個東西沒加進去,分別是最近的文章(Recent Post)、Comments(目前是用別人寫的widget)還有GVO的feed訂閱顯示、Beauty-Beta的訂閱顯示也都還沒放上去。 在Feed訂閱上,以前bl...