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

為什麼我支持《數位中介服務法》草案

在經歷許多次反抗台灣政府所立的網路相關法案後,我其實沒想過除了《數位通傳法》草案外,我還會再支持另一部法律草案,雖然 《數位通傳法》草案還壓在某處,但如果有人讀過《數位通傳法》的草案,再讀這部《數位中介服務法》草案,就會知道這部草案的重要性,而且也可以顯示台灣網路使用者的成熟度,更重要的,這是我第一次看到引入國際網路治理多方利害關係人機制的法律草案,而且是用在正確的地方。 有興趣想知道我在讀法條時的筆記和當下的感想,可以看我這則  Tweet 。這篇不使用逐條讀法條的方式來寫,因為那會讓人昏昏欲睡,我也不去比對歐盟《數位服務法》,因為我在讀《數位服務法》草案時,該草案特別強調是加強歐盟 E-Commerce Directive  ,而不是取代它,而且更多著重在預防盜版、仿冒,保護消費者的法案。所以當有輿論提到參考自《數位服務法》的《數位中介服務法》草案限縮言論自由時,我其實是一頭問號的,但一直到今天我才有時間讀《數位中介服務法》草案,這篇文章出自於我的個人經驗和閱讀法案的心得,與擔任的職務無關。 如果最近注意一下網路的資訊,有幾件事該注意一下: 有許多人在社群平台,如Facebook或是其他網路看到一些廣告,而這些廣告可能是要你支持台灣農產品、台灣製的產品,結果你收到時,上面還寫著簡體字,通常這是所謂的一頁式廣告詐騙,而行政院的消費者保護會在 2019 年時就有新聞稿在警告「 一頁式廣告詐騙多 小心查證保障多 」,之後像公視或是其他單位都有相關的活動在提醒大家小心這類廣告。但目前這些廣告其實多數不易處理,因為不容易取證、保留證據,等到追查到時已經找不到對方了。 有不少親密照片與影片在情侶分手後,被報復性的上傳到情色網站或透過即時通訊傳到親友的帳號裡,或是被洩露個資,遭到公開的霸凌。 之前有一個專題:「 青春煉獄:網路獵騙性私密影像事件簿 」,光是讀完這個專題報導我就覺得受傷。 有人使用 Deep Fake 把台灣名人的臉部照片合成至色情影片再上傳至色情影片平台,今年 7 月才被判刑。 還有許多創作者藉由網路分享作品時,被人盜用,甚至有國外的使用者修改台灣人的作品去參與比賽還獲獎。 有一次打電話問某個部會,如果消費者在國外電子商務平台買東西,但資料被外洩怎麼辦?雖然政府願意協助,但衡量至國外打官司的時間和成本,就會讓人卻步。 有些行為在現實世界裡有法...

觀察台灣 AI 政策與職場新挑戰

前言 這篇文章想和大家分享我對台灣 AI 政策的一些觀察。未來我還會整理其他國家的案例做比較。不過先提醒大家:這篇的資訊量不算太低,文章提及一些日常生活中不常接觸的政府計畫名稱、大筆預算金額與目標數字,乍看之下會讓人覺得很抽象。 對我來說,這些數字背後傳達的訊號很清楚──台灣政府確實願意投入大量資源在 AI 的產業發展與人才培訓。問題是,這些投資如何真正走到民眾與企業身邊?如何讓公司知道「資源在哪裡」、讓人才看見「機會在哪裡」?這條「最後一哩路」會決定政策成效,也才是和你我最相關的地方。 為了解台灣就業市場的實際需求,我偶爾會瀏覽人力銀行網站。有次看到某家公司在招聘條件中特別要求面試者在面試時分享「自己使用過哪些 AI 工具,以及如何使用」。這讓我注意到:AI 已經被視為職場的基本能力。 在日常生活中,AI 已廣泛應用於工作與個人任務。雖然部分單位仍不鼓勵員工使用,但只要有清楚的界限與正確的態度,AI 工具能有效減少重複性工作,把精力留給更有價值的任務。想像在學校寫報告,老師要求必須說明 AI 工具是怎麼幫上忙的;或在公司加班時,主管要求用 AI 快速整理資料。這些情境都不再是未來,而是現在。 我撰寫這篇文章的原因有二。首先,是因為參加 Anthropic 的 AI Fluency for Students 課程,課程內提到的 4D 概念對學生、新鮮人乃至現在於職場受到 AI 衝擊的世代都很有幫助。如果我是面試官,我會希望求職者能理解並應用這些觀念。其次,是我長期關注各國 AI 政策,想藉此分享觀察成果。這些分析大多是透過 AI 工具分析政府公開資料而得,也讓我更相信 AI 是研究工作人員的得力助手。  以技術與產業發展為核心的台灣AI政策 台灣的 AI 政策並不算落後。除了大家熟知的 DIGI+,政府陸續推動了「臺灣 AI 行動計畫」(2018–2021)以及「臺灣 AI 行動計畫 2.0」(2023–2026)。政策重點主要在產業發展與人才培育。 從預算來看,2025 年度 AI 行動計畫 2.0 編列經費最多的前三個部會為:經濟部、國科會與數位發展部;2026 年(115 年度)未核定的預算書顯示,數發部、經濟部與國科會仍是主要資源分配單位。大部分經費用於應用與普及,例如開發 AI 便利工具、藥物開發驗證平台等。 產業發展 台灣經濟結構仍以製造業為主...

陽光和蓮花的回憶--插曲

在惡夢連連之後,貨運送來一箱冷凍,送貨運的 叔叔 看我睡眼惺忪,再三提醒我:「要馬上冰起來哦!」洗臉以保持清醒拿刀子拆箱不會割到自己的手。 原來是爸爸在台南的同事寄來的十二塊破朴子餅和四袋蓮子。破朴子餅沒弄熱看起來濕答答,賣相不佳,所以不拍了,拍蓮子和凌晨我弄好的藕粉: 蓮子分為兩個品種,照片裡的是長型的蓮子,吃起來比較Q,有點彈性,拿來煮甜湯或是排骨湯都很好吃;圓型的蓮子口感比較鬆軟,適合燉排骨湯幫大人小孩補營養。照片中處理的方式,也可算用心處理了,現在鄉下大概也只剩老人家和外籍新娘願意處理吧? 上圖是還沒有煮熟的藕粉。 上圖是加了黑糖煮好冰涼的藕粉,不過我是用快速煮法,黑糖加的不夠多,不甜也不香。 上圖就是破朴子餅囉!媽媽試吃後覺得單吃也很好吃,而且一次要吃兩塊才夠味。 隨選歷史閱讀: Powered by Stuff-a-Blog Tags: diary , child hood , 藕粉 , 蓮子 , 白河