philip lelyveld The world of entertainment technology

Don’t Assume China’s AI Regulations Are Just a Power Play

[PhilNote: summary - the writer argues that keeping AI regulation vague allows it to evolve as the tech rapidly evolves. He mentions but doesn't stress the possibility of arbitrary government enforcement that this approach allows. ]

In March, new regulations entered into effect in China that require companies deploying recommendation algorithms to file details about those algorithms with the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC). In August, the CAC published summaries of 30 recommendation algorithms used by some of China’s largest tech companies. The release sparked a round of flawed commentary on China’s unprecedented attempt to regulate some types of artificial intelligence (AI), which has largely framed the goals of the regulation in maximalist terms without acknowledging other possible functions of the regulation. 

In particular, much of this commentary mischaracterizes the actual impact of the regulation....

Hao interprets the broadness of the regulations as a sign that China is eager to “police algorithms directly” and suggests that both the technical complexity of recommendation systems and the limitations of the CAC’s staff have made it difficult for China to follow through on its ambitions. ...

It is not hard to imagine that one goal of the Chinese algorithmic regulations may have been to signal to an international audience that China takes the harms caused by new and emerging technologies seriously—and that it was quicker to take action to rein in AI systems than any other country.  ...

A regulation like the CAC’s rules on recommendation systems helps solve this problem by communicating information about the central government’s priorities, which can shift company behavior even without any meaningful enforcement actions. ...

By avoiding specificity and stumbling over its own words during enforcement down the road, broad regulatory language allows the government to choose the time and place of oversight. ...

None of this is to say that this model of regulation is a good one, or that it ought to be emulated by the United States. There are major downsides to attempting to pass comprehensive technology regulations along these lines. Vague laws can significantly raise uncertainty and compliance costs, create risks of abuse from government regulators, and increase the likelihood that different jurisdictions may interpret the law differently. But there is a reasonable argument to be made that when the subject of the law is as fast developing as AI, “future-proof” legislation may need to be vague enough to accommodate substantial change in technical details, with significant discretion falling to regulators and judges to interpret implementation. ...

See the full story here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/dont-assume-chinas-ai-regulations-are-just-power-play