Sarcasm Alert: Banning ChatGPT

I am told that France, Germany, Canada, and Ireland are now looking to join Italy in banning or investigating ChatGPT – maybe temporarily.  I hope this bad idea doesn’t gain traction.

We must deal with the emergence of AI in parallel to having the conversation about rules, ethics, disabilities, accessibility, laws, hate speech, diversity, equity, inclusion, multiple voices, and on and on and on.  Indeed closing ChatGPT alone down is truly idiotic.  It is a giant global game of Whack-a-Mole.  As a metaphor, no technology has ever successfully developed perfect anti-porn search filters – even just for kids – and those also came with a myriad of problems. Taking a similar stance on AI is beyond short-sighted.

So, consider these scenarios:

1. Do you just ban ChatGPT alone?  Is this more a political position than an ethical position?  What about the many ChatGPT competitors and clones?  There are hundreds of them.  I am not saying that AI isn’t the two-sided coin of threat and opportunity.  It’s just a lot more complex and complicated than that.  Techno-peasants in the political realm aren’t the people to review this threat/opportunity.

2. Do we ban Large Language Models? (Dozens of them so far.) Do we start with English and then move on to other languages and merged LLMs?  What voices do we disable?  Lots of language is distasteful from a religion, hate, or cultural lens.  Can we avoid embedding cultural bias?  Probably not.  It’s just not desirable to replicate the dysfunctions of modern society in AI.

3. What about AI integrations into basic business and education tools?  Do we ban Word or ask MS to disable the AI in it?  What about PPT, Excel, etc.?  ChatGPT is moving forward in the entire MS suite as well as their partners (LinkedIn, SalesForce.com, etc.). What about every licensor or user of AI, Machine Learning, LLMs, and other AI infrastructure?

4. Do we disable any browser or search engine assists?  Are some small countries that might ban AI not worth the effort to include in the global tech environment due to the fact that as advertising targets or small languages/cultures.  Maybe big or small players would just choose to exit like some companies like retailers do?  Virtually all of the major browsers and search engines have added or announced AI Chat integrations to start.

5. What effect would this have on a countries competitiveness if that country used the dumbed down, not fully featured product?  What would the delay be in a country’s employment base and learners on their readiness for the inevitable changes?  Is falling behind on the learning and innovation curve a good idea?  IMNSHO, NO! Treating a nation like a National Park would cause stagnation and damage in my opinion.

6. What would a National Park Nation forbidding AI look like.  For starters, they would have special disabled versions of browsers, operating systems, programming code, APIs, applications, software, and so much more.  Of course, people in the government, law enforcement, and spy agencies would likely get a waiver.  Just normal people would be lawfully forbidden or blacked. WTF!  Naturally, these special cases would be among the last to get new features and updates.  We already see walled garden countries and they usually aren’t full democracies.  I doubt VPN can solve this one and poke holes in the Silicon Curtain.

7. So I ask – When do we get together on a global basis to address the issues?

• • Who should facilitate this?
  • Who must be at the table(s)?
  • What are the basic principles to follow?
  • Who sets the agenda and frames the work?
  • What is the roadmap and when do we report?
  • When can we choose what to do?
  • Are there standards for interoperability?
  • How do we encourage countries and international leaders to address the principles, codes, rules, regulations, laws, and more?

There should be much more but this is a start for a Saturday afternoon rant.

Stephen