Regulation of artificial intelligence
[1][2] The regulatory and policy landscape for AI is an emerging issue in jurisdictions worldwide, including for international organizations without direct enforcement power like the IEEE or the OECD.
[6][7] According to Stanford University's 2023 AI Index, the annual number of bills mentioning "artificial intelligence" passed in 127 surveyed countries jumped from one in 2016 to 37 in 2022.
[19][20][21] Public administration and policy considerations generally focus on the technical and economic implications and on trustworthy and human-centered AI systems,[22] although regulation of artificial superintelligences is also considered.
[25][26] Among the challenges, AI technology is rapidly evolving leading to a "pacing problem" where traditional laws and regulations often cannot keep up with emerging applications and their associated risks and benefits.
[7][50] Regulation of research into artificial general intelligence (AGI) focuses on the role of review boards, from university or corporation to international levels, and on encouraging research into AI safety,[50] together with the possibility of differential intellectual progress (prioritizing protective strategies over risky strategies in AI development) or conducting international mass surveillance to perform AGI arms control.
[7] Regulation of conscious, ethically aware AGIs focuses on how to integrate them with existing human society and can be divided into considerations of their legal standing and of their moral rights.
[56] The 15 founding members of the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence are Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, Slovenia, the United States and the UK.
GPAI's mandate covers four themes, two of which are supported by the International Centre of Expertise in Montréal for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, namely, responsible AI and data governance.
A draft text of a Recommendation on the Ethics of AI of the UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group was issued in September 2020 and included a call for legislative gaps to be filled.
This 10 article bill outlines objectives including missions to contribute to the elaboration of ethical principles, promote sustained investments in research, and remove barriers to innovation.
Article VI establishes subjective liability, meaning any individual that is damaged by an AI system and is wishing to receive compensation must specify the stakeholder and prove that there was a mistake in the machine's life cycle.
Scholars emphasize that it is out of legal order to assign an individual responsible for proving algorithmic errors given the high degree of autonomy, unpredictability, and complexity of AI systems.
This also drew attention to the currently occurring issues with face recognition systems in Brazil leading to unjust arrests by the police, which would then imply that when this bill is adopted, individuals would have to prove and justify these machine errors.
Multistakeholderism, more commonly referred to as Multistakeholder Governance, is defined as the practice of bringing multiple stakeholders to participate in dialogue, decision-making, and implementation of responses to jointly perceived problems.
[76][77] In Morocco, a new legislative proposal has been put forward by a coalition of political parties in Parliament to establish the National Agency for Artificial Intelligence (AI).
[63] In 2019, the Council of Europe initiated a process to assess the need for legally binding regulation of AI, focusing specifically on its implications for human rights and democratic values.
As regards compliance and enforcement, the Commission considers prior conformity assessments which could include 'procedures for testing, inspection or certification' and/or 'checks of the algorithms and of the data sets used in the development phase'.
[99] A January 2021 draft was leaked online on April 14, 2021,[100] before the Commission presented their official "Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence" a week later.
Academics have expressed concerns about various unclear elements in the proposal – such as the broad definition of what constitutes AI – and feared unintended legal implications, especially for vulnerable groups such as patients and migrants.
Weaker general-purpose AI models are subject transparency requirements, while those considered to pose "systemic risks" (notably those trained using computational capabilities exceeding 1025 FLOPS) must also undergo a thorough evaluation process.
[94] Among the stated guiding principles in the variety of legislative proposals in the area of AI under the von der Leyen Commission are the objectives of strategic autonomy[113] and the concept of digital sovereignty.
The implementation of the recommendations for action is intended to help to strengthen the German economy and science in the international competition in the field of artificial intelligence and create innovation-friendly conditions for this emerging technology.
On the one hand, NRM KI covers the focus topics in terms of applications (e.g. medicine, mobility, energy & environment, financial services, industrial automation) and fundamental issues (e.g. AI classification, security, certifiability, socio-technical systems, ethics).
On October 30, 2022, pursuant to government resolution 212 of August 2021, the Israeli Ministry of Innovation, Science and Technology released its "Principles of Policy, Regulation and Ethics in AI" white paper for public consultation.
[140] In the public sector, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport advised on data ethics and the Alan Turing Institute provided guidance on responsible design and implementation of AI systems.
In July 2023, the Biden–Harris Administration secured voluntary commitments from seven companies – Amazon, Anthropic, Google, Inflection, Meta, Microsoft, and OpenAI – to manage the risks associated with AI.
The Executive Order addresses a variety of issues, such as focusing on standards for critical infrastructure, AI-enhanced cybersecurity, and federally funded biological synthesis projects.
[179] It also called for foundation models to include "watermarks" to help the public discern between human and AI-generated content, which has raised controversy and criticism from deepfake detection researchers.
[186] This legislation's success was hoped by its supporters to inspire similar actions in other states, contributing to a unified approach to copyright and privacy in the digital age, and to reinforce the importance of safeguarding artists' rights against unauthorized use of their voices and likenesses.
[193] In 2016, China published a position paper questioning the adequacy of existing international law to address the eventuality of fully autonomous weapons, becoming the first permanent member of the U.N. Security Council to broach the issue,[47] and leading to proposals for global regulation.
