ARTIFICIALL INTELIGENCE, POLITICAL REGIME & CULTURAL NORMS: China VS. USA (Ihering Guedes Alcoforado)
Os aspectos políticos, educacionais e culturais começam a assumir protagonismo na determinação da trajetória de desenvolvimento da Inteligência Artificial e dos seus desdobramentos..
No âmbito político, Hickey (2018) nos chama atenção que “China, the global AI front-runner, is benefiting from an authoritarian regime that can plan 25 years ahead under the same leader…” [HICKEY, 2018]
Do ponto de vista da capacitação tecnológica Joseph Stigltz (2018a) chama atenção que a China, “ beyond catching up rapidly in its technological competence, China could actually lead in one of the key industries of the future: artificial intelligence. AI is based on big data, and the availability of data is fundamentally a political matter that implicates issues such as privacy, transparency, security, and the rules that frame economic competition.” e arremata “The EU, for its part, seems highly concerned with protecting data privacy, whereas China does not. Unfortunately, that could give China a large advantage in developing AI. And advantages in AI will extend well beyond the technology sector, potentially to almost every sector of the economy.”
Em função do exposto acima, Para Stiglitz (2018a) “Clearly, there needs to be a global agreement to set standards for developing and deploying AI and related technologies. Europeans should not have to compromise their genuinely held concerns about privacy just to promote trade, which is simply means (sometimes) to achieving higher living standards”
No âmbito cultural a China beneficia-se de uma cultural pro publicização. Laboure et al(2018) chamam atenção que “ … Chinese firms are benefiting from Chinese cultural norms concerning privacy. In the West, privacy is regarded as a personal right to one’s own space and, by extension, to one’s data. This conception of privacy is good for individuals and, arguably, for society; but it is bad for AI developers, who face hurdles accessing the data they need to train their algorithms.
By contrast ainda segundo Laboure et al (2018) “in Chinese culture, privacy is viewed suspiciously, as a form of secrecy. It is assumed that an honest person should have nothing to hide from the public domain, so Chinese consumers are often happy to give up their data. Unlike in India, which has adopted a “right to information,” and the European Union, which has codified a “right to be forgotten,” there has not been any serious discussion about data privacy in China.1 Em função disso, “That suits Chinese technology firms just fine. The legal framework in China allows tech firms to collect a wide range of user data for a wide range of purposes, such as constructing social-scoring systems, like Alibaba’s Sesame Credit.
Nessa mesma direção assinala Siglitz (2018) ao lembrar que : “[…] Chinese firms are benefiting from Chinese cultural norms concerning privacy. In the West, privacy is regarded as a personal right to one’s own space and, by extension, to one’s data. This conception of privacy is good for individuals and, arguably, for society; but it is bad for AI developers, who face hurdles accessing the data they need to train their algorithms. By contrast, in Chinese culture, privacy is viewed suspiciously, as a form of secrecy. It is assumed that an honest person should have nothing to hide from the public domain, so Chinese consumers are often happy to give up their data.”
Avantagem relativa da corrida pela liderança no âmbito da AI começa a evidenciar-se em função da sua especificidade no que se refere a disponibildade dos dados: “Unlike in India, which has adopted a “right to information,” and the European Union, which has codified a “right to be forgotten,” there has not been any serious discussion about data privacy in China.1 That suits Chinese technology firms just fine. The legal framework in China allows tech firms to collect a wide range of user data for a wide range of purposes, such as constructing social-scoring systems, like Alibaba’s Sesame Credit.”
Essas evidências torna imperativa a necessidade de aprofundar a reflexão sobre as regulação do acesso aos bancos de dados, em especial a questão da privacidade.
BIBLIOGRAFIA
BARNETT, E. (2010). Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg says privacy is no longer a ‘social norm’. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/6966628/
Facebooks-Mark-Zuckerberg-says-privacy-is-no-longer-a-social-norm.html
FERENSTEIN, G. (2013). Google’s Cerf says ‘privacy may be an anomaly’. Historically, he’s right. Tech Crunch, 20 November. Accessed at http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/20/
googles-cerf-says-privacy-may-be-an-anomaly-historically-hes-right/
JOHNSON, B. (2009) The Facebook privacy change angers campaigners.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/dec/10/facebook-privacy Disponibilizado em dez 2009 e consultado em 02 de abril de 2018
LABOURE, Marion et a (2018)The Rise of Silicon China https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-artificial-intelligence-research-development-by-marion-laboure-1-et-al-2018-04
STIGLITZ, Joseph.,(2018a) Trump’s Trade Confusion IN Project Syndicate, https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-unnecessary-trade-war-by-joseph-e--stiglitz-2018-04 Apr 5, 2018
HICKEY, Alex., What´i it going to take for the US to catch China in the AI race ? https://www.ciodive.com/news/whats-it-going-to-take-for-the-us-to-catch-china-in-the-ai-race/521297/. Consultado em 13/04/2018.