AI: Committees Are Smarter Than Developers?

April 27, 2021

I read “EU Outlines Ambitious AI Regulations Focused on Risky Uses.” The main idea seems to be that European Union regulators are smart enough to write rules for risky uses of numerical recipes. First, what’s risk, or, more accurately, what’s acceptable risk? Second, are regulators able to understand specific implementations of smart software designed for “uses”?

In my opinion, the answer to the first question is that “acceptable risk” is an interesting idea. It’s like ethical behavior, beauty, and evil. The answer to the second question is, “Not a chance.”

The write up reports:

Under the AI proposals, unacceptable uses would also include manipulating behavior, exploiting children’s vulnerabilities or using subliminal techniques.

How pray tell will lawyers, bureaucrats, and successful clothing sales professionals recognize a subliminal technique? Whom will these professional deciders believe when data are gathered from academics, allegedly suppressed businesses, and activists?

AI is now, and the write up makes clear that progress will be slow and painful:

To be sure, the draft rules have a long way to go before they take effect. They need to be reviewed by the European Parliament and the European Council and could be amended in a process that could take several years, though officials declined to give a specific timeframe.

To sum up, hubris is wonderful when enshrined in bureaucracy. How fast does AI change? A little quicker than an EU deliberation for sure.

Stephen E Arnold, April 27, 2021

Comments

Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta