Ever since AI applications moved into the mainstream, superlatives have been used liberally. Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google's parent company Alphabet, has called AI the "most profound technology humanity is working on." Geoffrey Hinton, dubbed the "Godfather of AI," left his position at Google to "speak out about the dangers of AI," and Warren Buffet compared the impact of AI to the development of the atomic bomb.
It was likely statements like these that contributed to the European AI Act seeing the light of day significantly faster than other EU legislative projects. Perhaps it was also the fact that the gap to leading AI nations like the USA and China was widening. In any case, something had to be done to assert Europe's position as an AI hub. An attempt not only to close the gap with the USA and China but also to lay the groundwork for responsible and sustainable use of AI.
The USA is taking a different approach, holding back on AI regulation for now. Arguing that the rapidly advancing technology cannot be regulated, the responsibility for self-regulation is placed in the hands of business leaders. For this reason, seven leading AI companies agreed on voluntary safeguards for the technology's development at a White House meeting in July 2023, committing to new standards for safety and trust.
Indeed, in all modern economies, the question arises of whether and how AI should be regulated. Many see the ideal solution in a balance between state intervention and self-regulation.
This white paper explores why AI regulation is necessary (B) and which regulatory concepts are suitable for this purpose (C). Subsequently, it examines which co-regulatory mechanisms are provided for in the AI Act (D) and how a co-regulatory framework must be designed to be effective (E). The white paper concludes with a summary (F) and an answer to the question of how much self-regulation the AI industry can tolerate.
Are you looking for a specific topic?
.png)
