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...

關於花精的FAQ(4)--使用篇

這部份有十六個Q & A,內容很多,我想應該可以解決在使用花精上最常見的疑問。 花精是芳香療法嗎?是保養品嗎?是藥品嗎? 花精應該算是順勢療法的一種,可以外用也可以食用,不能說是保養品,因為沒有保養品用在皮膚上的直接效果,可以確定的是,花精並不是藥品也不含所謂藥品的效用,但它確實能藉由自花朵萃取出來的能量來平衡人心中的負面情緒。 花精買回家之後要怎麼使用? 通常買回家的花精我們被稱為Stock Bottle,裡面有濃度較高的酒精,所以只要放在陰涼處通常可以放很久,但是如果你的居住地方較悶熱,還是建議放在冰箱裡會比較恰當。平常我們在使用的被稱為Treatment Bottle,調配方式如下: 你要先有一個30ml的玻璃瓶,要有滴管,可以少於30ml,買回家後先用沸水煮5分鐘。注意滴管部位的塑膠不要放到熱水裡。 在已消毒過的30ml玻璃瓶中加入礦泉水或是乾淨的飲用水。 從每個花精的Stock bottle裡各取出兩滴花精加到這30ml的瓶子裡。 每天喝四次,每次取四滴,加入水或是飲料裡,或是直接滴四滴到嘴巴裡。 如果你要搭配急救花精的話,加入Treatment Bottle中的急救花精是四滴,其他的花精還是以每種兩滴為主。 我已經有使用其他的花精了,我可以混用巴哈花精嗎? 原則上是不建議。像是如果你本身已經有澳洲花精的急救花精,就不建議再混合巴哈花精的急救花精。 花精在調配上最多幾種?可不可以三十八種全用? 一般而言一瓶Treatment Bottle裡最多不超過六種花精,因為太多的花精可能會讓你看不清楚自己真正需要的是什麼?也解決不了根本的問題,可能短期內改善了某種情緒但長期而言是沒有改變的,也有可能會互相抑制。但因為每個人的情況不同,有些人可能只需要一種或兩種;有些人可能需要調配到七種或八種,甚至有些人需要三十八種全部,當我們真正的了解自己的情緒問題出在哪裡時,就知道適合的花精到底有哪些,再慢慢的排除掉不需要的花精。 用錯花精會不會有不良的影響? 不會,花精是很溫和的東西,簡單的就成份上而言,它就是水而已,頂多加上了白蘭地防腐,特別一些的說法是,花精多了自然界的能量。花精所改善的是我們的負面情緒或是較黑暗的性格,如果選擇了不適合的花精也不會有什麼不好的影響。 如果我已經有其他品牌的急救花精,而且還有很多,我一定要再重新買巴哈急救花精嗎? 不用,選擇最適合自己...

參與 APRICOT 2018 心得 (3)

會場大廳 人脈與資訊的交流與建立 在 APRICOT 2018 裡,較以往參與不同的地方在於,這次直接去向以往只在網路上共事的朋友們見面。在 IGF 、 APrIGF 裡,有許多人可能都只在線上會議時出聲,討論事情,真正要見面時,可能是IGF、 ICANN 或是像 IETF 、APNIC⋯⋯等會議才有可能見到本人,但見到本人還不見得會有印象,大多數的人在腦海中存有的是某個名字的網路身份,而不是本人,另一個有趣的地方是這些人也多在這個領域裡流動。 現在流行的一個名詞「斜槓青年」其實早在網路領域裡出現。這些人可能是某家公司的員工,但同時是ICANN某個組織的成員,也可能是 APNIC 或 APNIC Foundation的職員,同時又兼任著 rIGF 或 IGF 的 MSG,所以會看到這些人會同時出現在:ICANN、APNIC、IGF 或 rIGF的會議裡,散布在世界各地,平均可能每兩個星期就開一次網路會議,但有些人在一年裡可能實際見面不超過100天。所以遇到有機會見面時,通常都會儘量找機會見面。 在這次的機會裡,也實際的與 APrIGF 2018裡其他的 MSG成員見面,也見到了 ICANN、APNIC、 ISOC 的成員。實際見到的感覺又很不一樣,使用網路工作的確能解決地域性的問題,也能讓不同的人透過網路來提供自己的專業,然而面對面的交流提供了「人」的溫度。 APrIGF 2018 MSGs 在會場合照,圖片來源: Jia-rong Low