#FREECIV AI NATIONS SOFTWARE#
Here, the EU act requires developers to show that their systems are safe, effective, privacy-compliant, transparent, explainable to users and non-discriminatory.įor ‘high-risk’ uses, which include software in law enforcement and education, the act requires detailed documentation, that all use of AI systems is automatically logged and that the systems are tested for their accuracy, security and fairness. This includes tools that guide decisions in social welfare and criminal justice, as well as those that help firms to choose which prospective employees to hire. Many other uses of AI software would be permitted, but with different requirements depending on their risk. The AI Act defines that as covering most uses in predictive policing, emotion recognition and real-time facial recognition.
Although the act might yet change because it needs to be agreed by all three voting EU bodies - the parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the EU - the current draft would ban the use of software that creates an unacceptable risk. This June, the EU’s parliament passed the AI Act - a giant piece of legislation that would categorize AI tools on the basis of their potential risk. In a sense, we’re witnessing a grand regulatory experiment. “It’s easy to say ‘Stop’, but so much harder to say, ‘Go in this direction’.” “Many people are saying this is the most important innovation humanity has ever produced,” says David Wang, chief innovation officer at Wilson Sonsini, a large law firm in Silicon Valley, California. And everyone is trying to work out to what degree regulation is needed specifically for AI, because existing laws might already address some of its risks.
#FREECIV AI NATIONS FREE#
In China, the government is trying to balance innovation with retaining its tight control over corporations and free speech. The United States, where many leading AI firms are based, has so far been the most hands-off. The EU is highly precautionary - its forthcoming Artificial Intelligence Act focuses on banning some uses and allowing others, while laying out due diligence for AI firms to follow.
Three key players - the United States, the EU and China - have so far taken different approaches, says Matthias Spielkamp, executive director of AlgorithmWatch, a Berlin-based non-profit organization that studies the effects of automation on society. Meanwhile, the technology is a constantly moving target. Even as California-based OpenAI and other firms have publicly called for more oversight, these companies have resisted some of the EU’s proposed controls and have advocated for international guidance bodies and voluntary commitments, rather than new laws. China already has AI regulations in place.īut in practice, people still dispute precisely what needs reining in, how risky AI is and what actually needs to be restricted. This year, the European Union is expected to pass its first broad AI laws after more than two years of debate. Many tech experts and non-experts agree, and the clamour for legal guard rails around AI is rising. “Regulation of AI is essential,” Sam Altman, chief executive of technology firm OpenAI, told US senators this May during a hearing on artificial intelligence (AI).
0 kommentar(er)
