UNESCO: USA is the one that regulates AI the most, but is against regulation – 02/19/2024 – Tech

The United States is the country that most regulates AI (artificial intelligence) in the world and this happens through state legislation, says UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) consultant Gustavo Macedo.

At the same time, the American Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, is working to stop tougher standards for controlling this technology, whose market leadership is taken over by American and Chinese companies.

At a meeting on AI safety held in November in the city of Bletchley, England, Blinken criticized the text on AI regulation, to which the European Parliament reached consensus on December 9. This was reported in a report by The New York Times and confirmed by Sheet based on a diplomatic telegram from Itamaraty obtained via the Access to Information Law.

The European regulation that will serve as an example for the world still needs to be sanctioned and must provide for an adaptation period until it comes into force.

Blinken’s argument was the possibility of European regulations harming American companies such as the creator of ChatGPT, OpenAI, Google and Microsoft, currently in a race against Chinese companies.

After the USA, the one that regulates AI the most is China, according to Macedo. “The fact of being a capitalist or a communist doesn’t mean much, the main factor is competition.”

Political scientist and specialist in international relations, Macedo participates in a group of researchers chosen by UNESCO to assess the stage of development of artificial intelligence in Brazil.

The country was chosen along with three other nations from the Global South (Chile, Morocco and Senegal) to serve as a test for a large comparative study that should involve more than 50 UNESCO members in a new phase that begins this year.

The Brazilian results have not yet been published, but the country was selected because it was considered a pioneer in the adoption of technology and because it also discussed in 2021 a national strategy for AI, the government’s Ebia (Brazilian Artificial Intelligence Strategy), which is now undergoing review.

Such as Sheet showed, Brazil began discussing AI regulation even before Europe, but the issue remains at an impasse.

“In relation to the G20 countries, Brazil is there, a little above average. But, if you look within the G20, the richest countries, Brazil is below average, but we will always try to compare Brazil with the most developed countries because we aim for development”, says Macedo about notions that have already been obtained from the research that should be published in the coming days.

Macedo was at an event held by UNESCO in Slovenia, on February 5th and 6th, to discuss ethical and political issues relating to artificial intelligence at the beginning of this month.

In the tug of war between the United States and China, the countries of the Global South end up as the most harmed because they do not have technological independence to guarantee access to the latest applications and still have to subject themselves to the processing of their data by external agents.

“A Brazilian cell phone has a Chinese application like TikTok, an American one like Instagram, a Russian one like Telegram and a Swedish one like Spotify”, explains Macedo, who is also a professor of international relations at Insper.

“Now, how many Brazilian applications will we have on a foreigner’s cell phone?” he asks.

Brazilian cell phones, the internet and data management are very open, in the researcher’s opinion. “Brazil is a market that often serves as a laboratory for these platforms, because our legislation allows them to enter.”

“China has bans on Meta products; in the United States, for example, there are already 15 states that have banned TikTok by law; in Russia, it is not possible to use Messenger or WhatsApp and, in India, it is similar “, it says.

European artificial intelligence legislation should also create barriers in this regard.

“Those regions of the world that are more advanced in terms of artificial intelligence are also more advanced in terms of regulation to guarantee digital sovereignty”, says Macedo.

According to the researcher, in the Global South, there is great concern about access to technology as an economic right to avoid worsening disparities between developed and developing countries.

The Brazilian Minister of Science and Technology, Luciana Santos, stated during the UNESCO event in Slovenia that the debate between peers should go beyond ethics and also discuss ways to decentralize control over artificial intelligence.

“In this way, the use of this technology is imposed, and minors are left with their hands tied: if there is no adoption, the country will be left out of the market,” said Santos.

This concern is also cited by groups representing software development in the country, such as Abes (Brazilian Association of Software Companies) and Câmara E-net.

These two groups, which also represent technology giants in the country such as Meta and Google, have already stated that Brazil could end the most restrictive legislation in the world if Congress approves the regulation format proposed in bill no. 2,338, of 2023, authored by the president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD).

“Regulation is not synonymous with restriction, it is synonymous with legal security and economic freedom”, counters Macedo.

“It’s normal for some people and companies to want to dominate the narrative of the discussion and pose as if any type of regulation could bring obstacles to economic development, when that’s not necessarily the case,” he says.

Macedo, however, assesses that the excitement and concern about artificial intelligence after the launch of ChatGPT, now reinforced by doubts about the use of AI in elections, should accelerate the debate on regulating this technology and platforms in general, as in this case of the fake news PL.

“Since ChatGPT was launched, we have had 89 bills involving control over the use of artificial intelligence directly or indirectly and this involves holding platforms accountable.”