The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The international regulatory dogpile on AI
Episode 453 of the Cyberlaw Podcast
Every government on the planet -- or nearly so -- announced last week an ambition to regulate artificial intelligence. Nate Jones and Jamil Jaffer take us through the announcements. What's particularly discouraging is the lack of imagination, as governments mostly dusted off their old prejudices to handle this new problem. Europe is obsessed with data protection, the Biden administration just wants to talk and wait and talk some more, while China must have asked an AI chatbot to assemble every regulatory proposal for AI ever made by anyone and translate it into Chinese law.
Meanwhile, companies trying to satisfy everyone are imposing weird limits on their AI, such as Microsoft's rule that asking for an image of Taiwan's flag is a violation of its terms of service. (For the record, so is asking for China's flag but not asking for an American or German flag.)
Matthew Heiman and Jamil take us through the strange case of the airman who leaked classified secrets on Discord. Jamil thinks we brought this on ourselves by not taking past leaks sufficiently seriously.
Jamil and I cover the imminent Montana statewide ban on TikTok. He thinks it's a harbinger; I think it may be a distraction that, like Trump's ban, produces more hostile judicial rulings.
Nate unpacks the California Court of Appeals' unpersuasive opinion on law enforcement use of geofencing warrants.
Matthew and I dig into the unanimous Supreme Court decision that should have independent administrative agencies like the FTC and SEC trembling. The court held that litigants don't need to wend their way through years of proceedings in front of the agencies before they can go to court and challenge the agencies' constitutional status. We both think that this is just the first shoe to drop. The next will be a full-bore challenge to the constitutionality of agencies beholden neither to the executive or Congress. If the FTC loses that one, I predict, the old socialist realist statue "Man Controlling Trade" that graces its entry may be replaced by one that both PETA and the Chamber of Commerce would probably like better. My thanks to Bing's Image Creator for the artwork.
In quick hits:
- I update listeners on the fight over renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the FBI's search of its 702 database for messages about Congressman Darin LaHood (R-IL). It's far from a scandal, and it may show that the whole effort to treat such searches as shocking privacy intrusions is bogus.
- Hackers have claimed deep access to Western Digital systems. The good news is that they seem unable to encrypt it all, so they're relying on doxing threats to earn the ransom they want.
- The Indian government has given itself authority to "fact check and order the deletion of social media posts. Nobody thinks that's a good idea, but when I ask whether it's all that different from the CDC/social media alliance that suppressed true information during COVID, Jamil disagrees. If you've missed our conservative catfights, you'll enjoy this.
You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If the people in government are doing it, they are going to screw it up and they are doing it for corrupt reasons.
These are just truisms of modern government.
If the SEC tells you what they think is true, of course you can ignore that.
"Nice little company you have there. It'd be a shame if anything happened to it. Or you."
I update listeners on the fight over renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the FBI’s search of its 702 database for messages about Congressman Darin LaHood (R-IL). It’s far from a scandal, and it may show that the whole effort to treat such searches as shocking privacy intrusions is bogus.
In order to detect such things, you’d need not just logged access, but uncorruptible logged access that used some kind of calculation on the log file so messing with it would be detectable.
This, of course, assumes a copy wasn't made wholesale.
Related to AI and the legal world, some folks here may be interested in a virtual (and in person) one day conference Friday sponsored by the University of Colorado law schools "Silicon Flatirons" center with a few panels:
https://siliconflatirons.org/events/exploring-generative-ai-and-law/
"Exploring Generative AI and Law: ChatGPT, Midjourney, and Other Innovations...
This conference will explore the role of Generative AI in several legal contexts. The first is the ability of Large Language Model AI Systems (LLMs) like ChatGPT to produce legal documents, such as contracts, legal pleadings, patents and other written legal instruments. Another is the impact of AI-generated art and music in the context of Copyright law and Fair Use. Finally, we will examine the societal implications of AI systems that can produce high quality outputs – such as legal documents or art – that previously only people could create."
As a European myself I was quite taken aback by the somewhat flippant observation on “European obsession with privacy”, particularly as I assumed that privacy would be among core libertarian values.
Listening to the podcast, I was even more disturbed. The podcasters had very little to say about the specific qualms with AI by the national privacy watch dogs associated in the European Data Protection Board. Their harsh language of calling them “clowns” did not disturb me too much because they have the reputation to only produce the weakest common denominator when it comes to European privacy protection. Yet, “clowns” was meant to castigate them for any attempt to reign in the happy-go lucky innovative entrepreneurs who advance technology "for the benefit of mankind".
Seriously? To hear EDPB treated on the same level with the Chinese government that is obsessed to socially control its citizens to the utmost is too annoying, though.
I can’t help but attributing that to an overarching commitment of US libertarians to economic and property rights, blind to any kind of power exercised by private actors as if they were any less dangerous than a tyrannical government.
Sorry, I don’t buy it.
I wouldn’t thank it. That grotesque image looks like the stone horse statue is giving birth to a full-sized hairy horse, or worse, it is some kind of hideous conjoined twin with its hoof sticking out of the crotch.
*** **** it, thanks for that image.
The statue in the photo is mistitled. It's correct name is "Man and his government."
Hello! Personally, I am very worried about the fact that AI can be used as a basis for programming online games. I'm not prone to panic but there are a lot of people who consider it their hobby. It would be foolish to lose a place in the ranking because of too smart bots. Looking at all this I am glad that my interests are focused on real sports - https://azscore.com Football, rugby, cricket - this is what will always be a living example of working on oneself.