This is always an interesting read for the rest of us neither in the US nor China.
On one hand I understand we'll need to move to more insular and protective policies and basically ban foreign technology in so many places, on the other hand I don't want a gov like Ethiopia to have the choice between having no technology or being spied to the bone by all of its tech providers. The EU would be the only place with a one in a million chance to pull it off, there sure must be another way ?
That's a slippery slope argument. I know regulating tech is not going to be popular here, and maybe we leave it for corporations that are valued at over a certain amount, but right now foreign governments are hacking our financial services companies, communications companies, phones, laptops, everything. 95% of the time a it's an extremely easy hack that would have been discovered by a routine scan.
Which'd be fine if we had one global government with world wide jurisdiction. Or technology choices from companies which couldn't be pressured by governments outside your personal regulation jurisdiction.
I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for those regulations to become law in, say, Chine or Turkey or Saudi Arabia. I'd bet even Israel won't pass them, surely NSO have enough political lobbying swing (and probably also suitable blackmail material on sitting politicians).
Historically, technologically advanced nations have worked together to develop some limited governance over sensitive technologies. It's an imperfect system, but tends to be better than a free-for-all.
well the danger here is that if US regulation becomes to burdensome then some other country will step up and other countries may just flat out ignore it. Which means an exciting and upcoming area of technology may eventually move off shore and hopefully one day off planet.
so effort will need to be made by pioneers in this area to shape US policy so it achieves the needed goals without being oppressive enough to shift to other sites
I understand the idealism, but the realistic alternative is that the US government abstains while other governments use the technology freely. Not sure how that's a better scenario, in a practical sense.
It's probably why OpenAI decided to remove the restriction.
Policies like this make it glaringly obvious how little our government representatives around the world understand technology.
It almost seems malicious, or at the very least anticompetitive. Who has access to such filtering systems already, or the resources to create one?
GRPR regulations, while I absolutely realize their necessity, have made it difficult for me to expand my side business into the EU. This would just be another road block for innovation.
The solution is more like making sure Technology X is ubiquitous before they can do anything. That makes it significantly harder to outlaw without undesirable political and economic side effects.
As governments become more and more obsolete in their failure to grasp and appropriately regulate rapidly evolving high technologies and their interactions with society, should we expect alternatives to arise? Perhaps global alternative institutions with the internet as the shared region.
The bottom line is the (monopoly?) that nation-states have over the use of force, such as might be used in control over the physical telecommunications infrastructure.
Government and money need to adapt to become high technologies.
Exactly. You make everything illegal or “regulated” (practically banned). The EU is already leading the way and has touched machine learning, end-to-end capable encryption and software distribution in various of its regulation directives.
- Communications (every chat software must come with spyware installed)
- AI (machine learning is too scary and authors say it will kill mankind, worse than a climate change)
- RISC-V (terrorists can use it in missiles)
- Open source (terrorists can run missiles and super computers with Linux)
- Software distribution (either because of communications or AI)
- Cryptocurrency wallets (interacting with a software wallet you wrote yourself makes your a suspicious and banks will deplatform you on the basis of anti-money laundering)
You need to remember that end-to-end encryption exporting was illegal in the US until 90s. Now when Trump has stacked supreme court with his own sockpuppets they may want to reverse any decision regarding this like they did with abortion.
It is obviously that we cannot do that because of the global competition.
Regulation of technology to reduce risk to society will just make competing part of society you have no influence on to dominate. And you lose on both fronts - technology domination, and ability to control it in the future.
I'm conflicted about this. On one hand it seems kind of silly but on the other I do feel like different countries ought to be able to try out different rules and laws. The globalized tech industry means the entire world looks through the same lens and I think there's a lot lost there.
Companies technologically focused or not have to comply with local regulations on a number of things: privacy, age restrictions, medical, gdpr, hipaa, etc. So you can't "just follow international norms" You have to follow local norms.
In the West we had tech coordinate Covid, election and other information with government.
But now the West is "uncomfortable" with others wanting to set their own narratives because we disagree with them for differing reasons.
One is hard pressed to say one is right and the other is wrong. They are the same coin showing different sides.
That's necessary, but not sufficient. We need both sane policies and technical measures to ensure that nothing less than those policies is possible. If we only have the technology, policy-makers can and will make life difficult both for the users and makers of these technologies; more draconian regimes will simply never allow those technologies to take root to begin with.
There is no legitimate way to regulate tech, it's an optional thing that people can use or not use. Right now there are people who go out of their way to avoid using Google and they manage to keep their jobs and even get to work using less attractive open source map apps. The practice of regulating tech exists right now in China and unlike communism there's a real possibility of it spreading.
The only useful regulation would be to forbid it and it probably won't happen. It also cannot prevent governments from doing it. Apart from regulation, we also need technical solutions.
Although when looked through policy-making perspective this change is further stabilizing the already dystopian trajectory of international tech laws.
The worst of the worst just keeps getting compiled and eventually voted through. And under the guise of "war on terrorism", "war on pedophiles", "war on hackers" etc.
I just don't see this ending anything but horribly.
Either with a monopoly driven "light-net" full of censorship, and no way of entry for the "smaller" businesses, ngo's, dissident groups etc.
On one hand I understand we'll need to move to more insular and protective policies and basically ban foreign technology in so many places, on the other hand I don't want a gov like Ethiopia to have the choice between having no technology or being spied to the bone by all of its tech providers. The EU would be the only place with a one in a million chance to pull it off, there sure must be another way ?
reply