tech

U.S. to seek global rules on AI misuse, Blinken says

8 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

8 Comments
Login to comment

I think this rule is going to be important for not only US but also other Democratic countries.

In EU it also made a rule for AI as an ethical code.

All these are for valuing an ethical perspectives and preventing greater control from some authoritarian countries

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The "west" is being a hypocrite as usual. Trying to impose their values on other countries. So it is "ethical" not to use all available tools to control crime.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The "west" is being a hypocrite as usual. Trying to impose their values on other countries. So it is "ethical" not to use all available tools to control crime.

Oh, I wasn't aware that ethics = using whatever means available to achieve the end of controlling crime.

That is a very interesting set of values. Perhaps I'm being hypocritical as a westerner but I actually enjoy living in a society where the government isn't able to do whatever it wants to me whenever it wants under the guise of "controlling crime". I also especially enjoy living in one where the definition of "crime" doesn't include things like stating contrary opinions or sharing images of Winnie the Pooh online.

Do you enjoy living in the People's Republic of China? I assume that is where you live and are enjoying life under the watchful eye of the surveillance state, right? Because otherwise it would of course be hypocrticial of you to denounce values that you are enjoying the protection of.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

We're at least a few hundred years from AI, provided the species survives that long. What you're talking about is ML (machine learning).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That’s completely naive and won’t work. You can compare it with nuclear research that led to atomic bombs, genetic research that has already or will soon lead to human cloning and creating of emotionally reduced military fighters, space research that leads to satellite based and anti-satellite weapons, virus research to a certain well-known pandemic and so on, the list is not limited. Whatever positive or negative can be developed will be developed one day sooner or later. AI won’t make the first and only exemption here for you naive dreamers.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

 So it is "ethical" not to use all available tools to control crime.

The US has a Constitution that is supposed to limit the ability of government to intrude on the lives of individuals, protect their homes and businesses from arbitrary search and a legal system that assumes both innocence until proven guilty, strict requirements for the legal collection of evidence and requires proof beyond a shadow of a doubt for criminal convictions. Nearly every state requires a unanimous jury verdict to convict someone of a crime. It is a longstanding principle of English law that it is better to let some who may be guilty of a crime go unpunished than to punish someone for a crime they did not commit because once factual innocence is no longer a guarantee one won't go to jail then there is no longer any reason to obey laws at all. Innocent or guilty you can go to jail. AI must be regulated to prevent government agencies from abusing individual rights and guarantees of privacy for the sake of solving crimes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Desert Tortoise, this is the heart of the problem forcing English Law on to other countries. Not even all of the US states use English Common Law.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Desert Tortoise, this is the heart of the problem forcing English Law on to other countries. Not even all of the US states use English Common Law.

Only Louisiana uses Napolionic law, but Federal law and all other states use English Common Law. The practical differences are minimal. English law is built upon precedent, meaning ruling on a given case is references how similar cases were decided in the past. Napoleonic or "Civil" law makes direct reference to the law as written without looking at prior cases.

In any event this matter with AI is not a case of the west forcing its legal structure upon the world. It is a case of western nations preventing inventors in other mostly developed nations creating AI monsters that will violate the universal rights of all mankind. Or do you not ascribe to the idea of universal human rights?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites