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

女性在防災包中應準備的物品

全球在這幾年地震頻繁,再加上戰爭的陰影愈來愈大,坊間已經有各種災難包的清單作為一般人備災參考,也看到有些廠商會與名人合作,推廣救災包的重要性。我也採購一個以減少準備的成本,但在檢視與思考廠商陳列的物資清單裡,還是少了什麼,特別是如果遇到戰爭時,那些救災包,不論是幫小朋友準備的、幫寵物準備的,看似很棒,仔細想想,比較像露營用的物品清單。 這讓我很沮喪,因為我買了一個還要花更多成本準備急救藥品的防災包。身為女性,我會選擇多備急救藥品及衛生物品,因為那是能保護生命與尊嚴的基本協助。 網站中所販售的急救內容物是備而不用,反而有些必要的物品,如 止血帶 、止痛藥等,可能因為法規管制而沒有被列在販售的急救藥品清單中,但也沒有詳細的列在教學文章中,許多必要的物品都被輕描淡寫的帶過。我雖然已採購該防災包,但仔細想想,那個可能比較像露營用的清單,有點後悔,但我會留著當基礎,再把沒必要的東西改為必要的物品。災難來臨時,我們都只能選擇必要的,而不是選擇想要的。 急救訓練時的經驗 專科時曾與同學接受紅十字會的急救訓練,有一堂課裡,參與的學員們都討論過「物盡其用」這件事,例如在山上突然骨折或不幸出現開放性傷口時,有什麼東西是可以拿來急救使用的?且當災難來臨時,我們只能帶必要的物品離開,也能減少不必要負重,確保行動方便。 我曾檢視過多份清單,但都沒有看到女性必備的物品。有些東西不論在何時對女性來說是必備的:保險套、避孕藥、衛生棉、消毒藥片,有些物品因為國內法規管制,所以不會在販售清單上出現,所以還是需要自己準備。 保險套 :在戰亂或災區,被迫流離失所時,女性容易因性暴力而面臨傳染病或非預期懷孕風險。雖然保險套無法完全保護女性尊嚴,但至少能減少性病與意外懷孕的風險。另一方面,與許多大型儲水袋相比,保險套體積小、攜帶方便,也能臨時裝水,在缺乏乾淨飲用水的環境下派上用場。 避孕藥 :若在災難或戰爭環境中,醫療資源極度不足,女性若意外懷孕,將面臨極高的健康危機。避孕藥雖然在一般通路不易買到,但若能事先向醫師取得處方並納入防災包,就能有效降低非計畫性懷孕。 衛生棉 :一般型的衛生棉也好,或是夜安型(例如34、40公分)的衛生棉,除了生理期使用外,厚實且吸水量大,在臨時缺少紗布或繃帶時,也可用作包紮或止血墊。如果場地髒亂,同時也能暫時保持傷口乾燥,減少感染風險。雖然占空間,但在災難環境中,這些吸水性佳的材...

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。