Narrowly targeting laws to specific countries or companies can have unintended consequences. They can push customers in different directions or serve as an unanticipated impetus for entrepreneurs to think of new and innovative approaches. In both instances, the outcomes are unexpected.
The Report on the Regulatory Framework for AI in India strikes the right mix of agile governance and light-touch supervision. However, its reliance on regulatory principles from the Global North could end up stifling innovation. We need to develop a framework that aligns more closely with our interests.
There are many who claim that the harms AI can cause can only be addressed by a new legislation specifically designed to address them. That said existing laws have, more often than not, been framed in terms that are broad enough to deal with these harms regardless of the technology that caused them.
AI is a probalistic, non-deterministic technology. This is the reason why it is capable of doing much of what we appreciate it for. However, this does not align with our legal system that is binary in application. We need to rethink our approach to liability if we are to avail the benefits of AI.
As we rely more and more on AI for information it is almost inevitable that companies will try to game the answer these AI chatbots provide to ensure that information favourable to them bubbles to the top. This has already begun to happen and it is only a matter of time before AI optimisation replaces SEO.
AI really comes into its own when we need customised solutions at scale. If we can identify use cases in which human intervention is simply not practical given the complexity and diversity of outcomes, AI might just be able to offer a way out. Such as, for instance, to provide bespoke education outcomes.
There is no doubt that AI will fundamentally change the ways in which films are made. But rather than worry about how this might affect the film-making process, we should embrace the change that is about to come and use it to think up new approaches to story-telling.
All innovations build on those that came before. It is important to strike a balance between leveraging intellectual property protection for commercial benefit and stifling innovation in the process. And this is particularly relevant in the context of AI.
Everyone agrees that there is an urgent need to reform many aspects of the judicial system. One way to do this might be to re-consider the reliance we currently place on oral advocacy and try and find an alternative way of doing things. Maybe even get rid of it entirely.
One of the fastest growing categories of AI services is artificial companions. Recent advances in large language models have significantly accelerated its proliferation. But as much as there are benefits to conversational engagement with artificial intelligence, there are psychological implications we will have to consider.
