AI and Regulations

Recently there was news that Italy had banned an AI chatbot named Replika. Rahul Matthan’s blog identifies the reason for that – the EU’s GDPR regulation (simplistically put, GDPR is an EU regulation on data privacy). So what are the base principles of GDPR? And what are the problems with those principles when it comes to AI?

 

Number 1 on that list is “consent” – seeking explicit permission before using data. An exception is allowed if said data collection is “necessary” for some “legitimate purpose”. The way AI’s work, they just scour the Net for info and stitch it together in unimaginable ways to derive conclusions from it. By definition, the company that created the AI cannot know to what purpose the AI might put that info to use. GDPR was framed in simpler times when companies could be expected to know what they would do with the data. Not anymore.

 

Number 2 is that data collection be restricted to what is relevant to the task at hand. And that the data be retained only for as long as necessary. The way AI’s work, they need huge data sets stored forever (practically) to be able to derive patterns and long-term trends. The contradiction with GDPR is evident.

 

The third problem is… let me just explain it since I can’t find one word to summarize it. If a form asks you for some data, you can instinctively sense whether the ask seems irrelevant to the task at hand. But with chatbots, such things blend into the “conversation”. You answer without pausing, the way you would have in a, er, conversation with a fellow human. Even the company that owns the chatbot doesn’t know how the AI might use this seemingly irrelevant data to draw a meaningful connection.

 

Matthan therefore asks the right question:

“What if the problem does not lie with the technology. What if what needs to change are the laws that are being used to regulate it? Just because generative AI does not meet the requirements set out under the GDPR does that mean we should prohibit that technology from being used. Or should we, instead, try and redesign our regulatory frameworks so that they can enable these new technologies to function better?”

 

A very valid point indeed. Whether the EU will update its regulations, only time will tell. But I can see that the major entities today have seriously different views on AI. The EU, having no AI companies or even Internet giants, tends to think only of the privacy of its citizens. The US, on the other hand, tries to juggle the contradictory pulls of privacy for citizens v/s corporate needs. India and China feel AI and everything based on Internet/smartphone only fulfils needs that are not currently met in the country, so they feel AI does more good than harm, and are thus inclined to let AI move forward with few restrictions.

 

Therefore, I don’t see any global consensus on the topic emerging.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why we Deceive Ourselves

In their book, The Elephant in the Brain , the authors describe this weird aspect of deception that we practice: deceiving ourselves! That is so weird: “If our minds contain maps of our worlds, what good comes from having an inaccurate version of these maps?” The Sigmund Freud school of thought treats self-deception as a defense mechanism, “a way for the ego to protect itself”. The mind seeks to protect itself from anxiety and other negative emotions. Many object to this reasoning: since accurate information is so critical to our survival, surely distorting information would be dangerous. Wouldn’t the goal of protecting our self-esteem have been better achieved by making the brain’s self-esteem mechanism stronger instead? The new school of thought explains self-deception as “primarily outward-facing, manipulative, and ultimately self-serving”. This is based on Thomas Schelling’s work on game theory: “In a variety of scenarios, limiting or sabotaging yourself is the winn...
Read more

Europe #3 - Innsbruck

The last city we visited in Europe was Innsbruck in the Austrian Alps. After the cold and windy experience (at times) of Paris and Netherlands, Innsbruck was a wonderful change – it didn’t feel that cold, it was not windy all of which made it easy to walk around. Something absolutely necessary given how scenic the place is.   Since the hotel check-in time was much later in the day, we left the baggage and went to the Swarovski HQ-cum-museum about an hour by bus from Innsbruck. The crystal exhibits were brilliant – colorful, bright, shiny. Jewellery aside, it was a display of what one can do with crystals. While my wife and daughter loved the jewellery, I liked the superhero themed exhibits of Batman, Spiderman, the Hulk, and Star Wars. We didn’t buy anything there, though we did buy stuff in the Swarovski store in Innsbruck – jewellery, not the superhero stuff.   Innsbruck is a major tourist attraction during the skiing season but now in summer, we saw many groups of ...
Read more

The Thrill of the Chase

So many people complain about the difficulty in making decisions while shopping. Do you buy Brand X that gives 20% extra free? Or Brand Y that has 10% off? Or Brand Z that gives something else free with it? Do you buy that flat screen TV today or wait for the sale at Diwali? Now since the customer is king, shouldn’t companies be simplifying pricing choices? Like maybe offering consistently low prices all the time? Not so fast, as the US store, JC Penney discovered to its cost. Turns out that while people do complain about pricing choices, they are irrational. Also, they enjoy the thrill of the chase. Huh? The word “sale” acts like a siren call for many people: it lures them in to make that purchase. Consistently low prices don’t do the same. Besides, if a competitor lowers their prices just one time of the year, and Poof! Suddenly that low price claim becomes suspect in shoppers’ eyes. Then there are those sites that offer coupons: have lunch at Restaurant A on Wedne...
Read more