Before the advent of generative AI, the Chinese government had attached great importance to this field and promoted the steady development of the industry through a series of policies. These policies cover talent training, technological innovation, tax incentives and intellectual property protection, providing strong support for the AI industry.
According to the Report on the Development of Generative AI Applications, a review of relevant policies from 2016 to the present shows that from 2016 to 2020, the government mainly focused on development planning and talent development; After 2020, especially since 2023, the policy focus has gradually shifted to the improvement of the standard system and industry norms, and important documents such as the Interim Measures for the Management of Generative AI Services, the Guidelines for the Construction of a Comprehensive Standardization System for the National Artificial Intelligence Industry, and the Artificial Intelligence Security Governance Framework have been issued one after another.
The evolution of AI policy reflects the different stages of industrial development. By the end of 2022, AI will be more integrated into various industries as a technical tool; After the advent of ChatGPT, generative AI has gradually emerged as an independent product, driving the policy direction to adjust accordingly, showing the characteristics of dynamic adaptation.
International policy: There are obvious differences in policies between Europe, the United States and Asia, each with its own strengths
From a global perspective, there are currently no widely accepted AI regulatory rules or uniform standards, and there is also a lack of dedicated international bodies to regulate its development. Based on their own interests, European and American countries have their own regulatory strategies, and there are obvious differences. At the same time, Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Singapore are also actively formulating policies and improving regulatory systems to cope with the rapid changes in the AI industry. The policies introduced by various countries also have different characteristics:
the European Union:
Proposed AI Bill: Classify AI risk levels as unacceptable, high-risk, limited-risk, low, or mild-risk. prohibit artificial intelligence systems with unacceptable risks, such as subliminal technology, real-time remote biometric identification systems in public places, etc.; Providers of high-risk AI systems are required to register in the European Commission's database and undergo a pre-assessment process, and high-risk systems used for biometrics are subject to an assessment by an EU certification body; Limited risk systems are subject to transparency requirements. For general-purpose AI and basic models, it is required that general-purpose AI systems be subject to high-risk regulatory rules, and that the provider of the basic model must be registered in the EU database.
Features: With risk classification management as the core, a comprehensive, systematic and strict regulatory framework has been constructed, and detailed and targeted regulatory measures have been formulated for AI systems with different risk levels, with special attention to the supervision of high-risk systems and the protection of basic rights, and special attention to the supervision of general-purpose artificial intelligence and basic models, and at the same time clarifying strict enforcement mechanisms and punishment measures.
Figure: Europe, the United States and Asia have obvious policy differences, each with its own strengths (Source: Intellizence)
Korea
Policy content: South Korea has adopted the Basic Law on the Development and Reliance of Artificial Intelligence, which provides a comprehensive legal basis for the construction of national AI infrastructure, high-risk AI regulation, transparency and ethical principles, and compliance requirements for foreign AI service providers.
Features: It provides comprehensive support for the development and supervision of artificial intelligence from the basic legal level, focuses on building a foundation of trust for the development of artificial intelligence, covers infrastructure construction, risk supervision, ethics and other aspects, and provides a more systematic legal framework for the development and standardized application of artificial intelligence industry.
Singapore
Policy content: Singapore's Infocomm Media Development Authority launches the Model Framework for Generative AI Governance.
Features: Focusing on providing a framework of demonstration, providing guidance and reference for the governance of generative AI, it is highly guiding and demonstrative, aiming to help enterprises and organizations better understand and respond to the challenges and opportunities brought by generative AI, and promote the healthy development of AI in Singapore, while focusing on alignment with international standards and practices.
In the global wave of artificial intelligence, the generative AI policies of various countries show a diversified pattern. The EU's strict risk management, the US's decentralized multi-agent guidance, the UK's flexible and light-touch regulation, South Korea's comprehensive legal support, and Singapore's model framework have all provided valuable experience for the development and regulation of generative AI. As generative AI technology continues to push boundaries and shape new forms of economy, society and life, national policies will continue to adapt and improve in practice.
Related:
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (1)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (2)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (3)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (4)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (5)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (6)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (7)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (8)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (9)
Analysis of the Application Development Report of Generative Artificial Intelligence (10)
