Approach to AI

Is AI over-hyped? Or is it going to transform the landscape so drastically that it would be unrecognizable? Like how electricity did a century back?

 

If it will/does shake up the job market drastically, how quickly/slowly would that happen? At the pace of electricity (quite fast, but nowhere close to overnight)? Or much slower? Or way, way faster?

 

It was in the context of these questions that (right or wrong) China’s approach being so different from the US is worth checking out.

 

AI, if it were to be as transformative as some say (fear?), would cause massive job losses and social upheaval, the backdrop to every revolution. Which is why the Chinese government (single-party rule system) is wary. On the other hand, China can’t ignore AI, given how much potential it has, plus the risk of its arch-rival running too far ahead. Therein lies China’s AI dilemma. What then is China’s AI approach?

 

Since 2023, all public facing AI models must be filed with Chinese regulators before launch. Thus, China’s AI registry provides insight into the following aspects, writes Zilan Qian. (1) “Who is building what, where, and when”, (2) What kind of AI models are being developed/trained? (3) In which areas are AI models being deployed (made available for use)?

 

(To be clear, only (Chinese) private sector forays are knowable with this registry. If the government itself is doing stuff, that can’t be known. Then again, that is not the topic of this blog anyway).

 

In the private sector space, the Chinese government is clear – if the possible use/impact of AI would lead to unmanageable job losses, well, that wouldn’t be acceptable and would almost certainly be blocked/banned.

 

Is this the right approach to AI for other countries? No country can risk ignoring it, and then falling too far behind. But the social upheaval AI could cause isn’t desirable either, at least not at the speed it may happen (Periodic, gradual overhaul of society will keep happening). Then again, are governments even qualified to gauge which areas of research/application of AI could be fast and disruptive v/s slow and manageable?

 

Like I said, maybe the Chinese approach is all wrong. Or maybe they are right to some/large degree. But just assuming that an unbridled Ashvamedha style approach of letting AI go wherever, do whatever doesn’t sound right either.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Need for an Informed Aadhar Debate

As Aadhar increases in scope, supporters consider it necessary, says L.Viswanath : “We have Aadhaar getting linked to ration cards, NREGA payments, PAN cards, bank accounts, mobile SIMs, mid-day meals in schools, school admissions, university admissions…the list is endless. In a country plagued by corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency, the hope is that Aadhaar will help eliminate fraudulent identities, thereby saving the direct and indirect losses to the nation.” Conversely, opponents don’t cite concrete use-cases of how it might be abused apart from throwing phrases (“Orwellian state”) that sound scary. Until its opponents provide such details, supporters will win the argument by simply asking why Aadhar should be restricted only to subsidy schemes, as Subhashis Banerjee points out : “Admittedly there are substantial leakages in these schemes, but surely the need for de-duplication and strict record keeping and audits are as much, if not more, in the domains of tax co...
Read more

Nazis and the Physics Connection

When the Nazi government seized power, they started removing Jews from more and more positions, including the civil services, and the science departments of Germany. Those physicists who saw the writing on the wall fled to either UK (like Schrodinger) or the US (like Einstein), writes Adam Becker in What is Real?   The great physicist, Enrico Fermi, wasn’t a Jew. But when Mussolini aligned with Hitler, Fermi came under suspicion since his wife was a Jew. To make matters problematic, Mussolini’s new laws had made it illegal to take “more than pocket change” out of Italy. Neils Bohr broke an unwritten rule of the Nobel and told Fermi that he (Fermi) was in the running for the Nobel that year. Perhaps Fermi, should he win, could consider escaping from Stockholm with the prize money to start a new life? Fermi agreed, but it was touch and go – his wife’s passport had been confiscated, which meant she couldn’t come to Stockholm. Fermi managed to pull a few strings to get her passport...
Read more

1991 - Liberalization

After the fall of Chandra Shekhar’s government, elections were called in 1991. During the campaign, Rajiv Gandhi got assassinated. That set off a sympathy wave – during the phases before Rajiv’s murder, the Congress won 50 of the 196 seats; post-that, it won 177 of 285 seats. The Congress now had enough seats (227) to try and form a coalition government. But who should head it? There was no obvious “heir” from the Family. With 100 of the 227 seats being from the south, PV Narasimha Rao (PV from here for short) had an edge, and he became the Prime Minister, writes Sanjaya Baru in 1991 .   The first order of business was, yes, that balance of payments crisis. PV’s first choice for Finance Minister was IG Patel, who had been Chandra Shekhar’s first choice too. Patel declined both PM’s offers to be the Finance Minister (FM). As PV continued his search, he found Manmohan Singh.   In his first address to the nation, in his deadpan manner, PV made a couple of statements that ...
Read more