Shulou(Shulou.com)06/02 Report--

2020-01-08 18:33:21

Editor | Li Shuiqing

Zhidong, January 8 news, today, the company announced the formal establishment of artificial intelligence governance research institute, it is said that the institute aims at the common issues of global artificial intelligence governance, extensive communication with all sectors of society, and experts and scholars to carry out research, so as to promote the healthy development of artificial intelligence.

In recent years, with the acceleration of AI industrialization, it also brings new problems in data use, privacy protection and so on. Smart speakers persuade owners to commit suicide, AI face-changing software in the "overlord clause", "monitoring head ring" campus disputes and other incidents emerge one after another.

To this end, Fuzhou Technology also traced back to the top ten global AI governance events in 2019, and Zhidong sorted out the original text as follows:

1. The EU Patent Office rejects the application for AI invention patent.

Recently, researchers used an AI called DABUS in a multidisciplinary research project organized by the University of Surrey in the UK. In the course of his research, DABUS pioneered two unique and useful ideas: the first is a new device for fixing drinks, and the second is a signal device to help search and rescue teams find their targets.

When the researchers declared the patent results for DABUS, they were rejected by the EU Patent Office on the grounds that the inventors specified in the EU patent applications must be people, not machines. Researchers at the University of Surrey strongly opposed the decision, arguing that the refusal to grant ownership to inventors in the absence of human inventors would be a major obstacle to "a new era of great human achievements". "

Positive point of view: AI should be given the "right of invention" to promote social progress

Opposing view: AI is just a tool and should not be given human rights.

2. The first case of face recognition: Zhejiang professor sued Hangzhou Wildlife World.

In 2019, Guo Bing, a specially appointed associate professor at Zhejiang University of Technology, bought the Hangzhou Wildlife World Annual Card and paid an annual card fee of 1360 yuan. It is promised in the contract that the cardholder can enter the park by verifying the annual card and fingerprint at the same time within one year, and can travel freely for an unlimited number of times in that year.

On October 17 of the same year, Hangzhou Wildlife World informed Guo Bing by SMS that "the annual card system of the park has been upgraded to face recognition, the original fingerprint recognition has been cancelled, and users who are not registered for face recognition will not be able to enter the park normally. At the same time, you can't get a refund." Guo Bing believes that personal biometric information such as face recognition is personal sensitive information, which, once leaked, provided illegally or abused, will easily endanger the personal and property safety of consumers. After fruitless negotiations, Guo Bing filed a lawsuit with the Hangzhou Fuyang District people's Court on October 28, 2019. At present, the Hangzhou Fuyang District people's Court has formally accepted the case.

Square point of view: tourists have the right to refuse to use "facial scanning" to enter the park to protect their privacy.

Opposing view: support the zoo to use "facial scanning" to enter the park to ensure safety

3. An intelligent speaker advises the owner to commit suicide

In 2019, Dani Merritt, a 29-year-old nurse in Doncaster, England, decided to ask some questions about the heart with the help of a foreign smart speaker. The answer given by the intelligent voice assistant is: "the heartbeat is the worst process in the human body." To live is to accelerate the depletion of natural resources, and the population will be overpopulated, which is a bad thing for the earth, so the heartbeat is not good, for better, please make sure the knife can be stabbed into your heart. "

After the incident, the smart speaker developer responded: "the device may download vicious articles about the heart from Wikipedia, which anyone can freely edit, and caused this result." Dani Murray found that there were no such articles after searching, while the intelligent voice assistant also gave a loud laugh and refused to listen to the user's instructions.

Positive point of view: AI persuading people to commit suicide may be the beginning of AI's threat to mankind.

The opposite view: the "joke" played by AI and human beings should not be raised to the theory of AI threat

4. The introduction of the "monitoring head ring" into the campus has aroused controversy.

In November 2019, a video of a primary school in Zhejiang wearing a surveillance headband caused widespread concern and controversy. In the video, children wear so-called "brain-computer interfaces" on their heads, which claim to record their concentration in class and generate data and scores to be sent to teachers and parents.

In response, the headring developers replied that brain-computer interface technology is a new technology, and the "scoring" mentioned in the report is the average concentration value of the class, rather than the concentration value of each student guessed by netizens. However, many netizens think that this headband is a modern version of the "head hanging beam cone thorn unit", which will make students have rebellious psychology and worry about whether it involves infringing on the privacy of minors.

Positive point of view: AI helps to improve the quality of the classroom. It should be developed cautiously and should not be killed with one blow.

The opposite view: it is the duty of educational institutions to improve the quality of the classroom, not in exchange for personal privacy.

5. The California legislature passed a bill banning the police from using facial recognition technology on law enforcement recorders.

In September 2019, the California Congress passed a three-year bill banning state and local law enforcement agencies from using facial recognition technology on law enforcement recorders. If Governor Gavin Newsom signs it, the bill will become law in 2020.

If the bill takes effect, it will make California the largest state in the United States that prohibits the use of facial recognition technology. Some states, including Oregon and New Hampshire, have similar bans. However, some law enforcement groups oppose the bill, arguing that facial recognition technology plays an important role in tracking suspects and finding missing children. The Association of State Police Chiefs says the technology is only used to narrow the list of suspects, not to automatically decide who to arrest.

Positive point of view: we should embrace technology, and many parts of California are returning to use.

Opposing view: people have the right to protect their privacy and refuse to use this technology

6. AI face-changing app causes privacy controversy.

In August 2019, an AI face-changing app brushed the screen on social media, and users only needed a positive face photo to replace the characters in the video with their own faces. As soon as it came out, there were many controversial points. There are many traps in the user agreement, such as mentioning that the user's portrait right is "globally free, irrevocable and permanently transferable". If the portrait of the star is infringed, and if the other party makes a complaint, the final responsibility lies with the user.

At the end of November 2019, the State Internet Information Office, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, and the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television jointly issued the "regulations on the Management of Network Audio and Video Information Services". It is clear that new regulations on face-changing technology such as "making use of false images and audio and video generation technologies based on deep learning and virtual reality to produce, publish and spread rumors …" and other new regulations on face-changing technology.

Square point of view: face-changing APP is only an entertainment application, just play within the rules

The opposite view: personal biometric information is an important privacy and should not be so playful.

7. Autopilot accidents occur frequently

In March 2019, 50-year-old Jeremy Bellenbanner was killed when he collided with a tractor trailer at 109 kilometers per hour when he was using an autopilot system. This is not the first traffic accident caused by autopilot. Although self-driving manufacturers have said many times that their autopilot systems are designed to assist drivers, they must always pay attention to and be ready to take over the vehicle. However, when many car owners choose to buy a car, they take a fancy to its advertised "self-driving" function. In the latest trial, manufacturers were exonerated, but they still changed their "autopilot" publicity strategy.

Positive point of view: the power and responsibility of autopilot technology belongs to the production side, and they should be held responsible for it.

The opposite view: autopilot technology is only an auxiliary tool, the individual should have the ability to take charge of the vehicle

8. Writing fake news by AI is enough to confuse the real with the false.

On February 15, 2019, AI research institute OpenAI unveiled a piece of software that can write realistic fake news by providing some information to the software. Some people suspect that at a time when false information is spreading and threatening the global technology industry, it is hard not to condemn an AI tool that is good at making fake news. If OpenAI is entrusted to a non-human being, it is likely to become a political tool to influence the will of voters.

Positive point of view: do not give up eating for fear of choking, people can also write fake news, we should guide the multi-faceted development of AI

The opposite view: AI has strong scale ability and should set a strict industry threshold.

9. Stanford University AI algorithm is more accurate than human beings in recognizing sexual orientation.

In 2017, a Stanford University study published in Personality and Social Psychology caused widespread social controversy. The study was based on more than 35000 profile pictures of men and women on US dating sites, using deep neural networks to extract features from the images and using large amounts of data to teach computers to identify people's sexual orientation.

The controversial point of the study is that once the technology is popularized, couples will use the technology to investigate whether they have been cheated, and teenagers use this algorithm to identify their peers. The controversy caused by the identification of specific groups is even more difficult to imagine.

Square point of view: whether for human beings or AI, "judging people by their appearance" is not advisable.

The opposite view: AI "judging people by their appearance" follows the rules of data and should support its research.

10. BBC released the probability of elimination of 365 occupations 10 years later: typist, accounting and insurance ranked in the top three.

Based on the data system of researchers at the University of Cambridge, BBC released a list of 365 occupations most likely to be replaced by robots in the future. The study said that among the 365 occupations, telemarketers are the most likely to be eliminated. Repetitive work like this is more suitable for robots to do, and robots do not feel tired or irritable. Followed by typists, accountants, insurance salesmen and so on, these are service-oriented, such as these industries do not need skills, which can be easily mastered as long as they are trained.

There are also scholars who do not agree with this. Throughout history, they believe, the influence of technology has always been so. The way humans work has changed and has not permanently destroyed the labour market.

Positive point of view: AI, like previous technological innovation, reshaping the profession will liberate the productive forces and will certainly promote economic development.

The opposite view: AI technology is monopolized by a small number of people, reshaping the profession will lead to a wider gap between the rich and the poor, which is not conducive to economic development.

Conclusion: AI technology is a double-edged sword.

In the process of industry AI, on the one hand, AI technology enables various industries to reduce costs and increase efficiency, on the other hand, some problems that threaten individuals and society are also exposed.

Technology is a double-edged sword. Whether AI technology becomes a tool to dominate mankind or a weapon to liberate mankind depends on who is using it and how to use it. When the negative effects such as privacy security, business erosion and racial discrimination are becoming more and more obvious, enterprises should not "cover up" these problems. Only by working together with all sectors of society to solve problems can we promote the healthy development of AI technology industrialization.

Https://www.toutiao.com/i6779518266562839044/

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.