This post was originally published on this site.
Harnessing the power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a rallying cry for policymakers worldwide, and Thailand is no exception.
Last week, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra jumped on the AI bandwagon by announcing that the government is preparing Thailand’s first law on the controversial fledgling technology.
According to the PM, the primary purpose of the groundbreaking legislation is “strengthening businesses and the economy”.
It is noteworthy that nothing was said about protecting consumers or maintaining a level playing field across different sectors.
Her view is consistent with that of the chairman of the Federation of Thai Industries (FTI), Kriengkrai Thiennukul, who has been eagerly pushing for greater adoption of AI technology in Thai manufacturing.
The federation has even established a new unit to promote innovation, including AI, to help entrepreneurs reduce costs while increasing competitiveness and the return on investment.
There should be no dispute that the country needs to “regulate” AI, but the question is “how?”.
A narrow focus on economic benefits fails to address some of the broader, more pertinent challenges ahead.
These include the negative impact that AI could have on jobs and the future of employment, the need for ethical deployment in the public interest, not just as a sales-boosting or cost-cutting tool, and the risk of widening economic as well as social disparities.
AI is not viewed as history’s most disruptive technology for no reason. Billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk, who is also the CEO of Tesla and founder of SpaceX, made a striking prediction last year that AI will eventually eradicate all jobs as it would provide the necessary goods and services.
Mr Musk believes an AI-driven future would be a benevolent one, suggesting that people will then need to work only as a “hobby” while enjoying “universal high incomes”. Of course, Mr Musk is an immensely brilliant innovator, and his predictions warrant careful scrutiny. But in the long run, without paid employees, what is the wealth generation and redistribution cycle that will fund purchases of goods that are created by AI and smart robots?
The transition towards such a future requires careful planning and robust policy frameworks to ensure the benefits of AI advancement are shared fairly, not concentrated among the privileged few.
While a public hearing two years ago garnered various recommendations, fundamental concerns persist.
Chief among them is whether more stakeholders should be engaged to weigh in, as the business sector and government may not roll out a legal framework that serves the public good rather than merely corporate interests.
Although PM Paetongtarn emphasised that the AI bill should be ready soon, many questions remain unanswered, and significant concerns have apparently been left unaddressed.
Consider the composition of the AI promotion committee itself. Is it prudent to limit membership of government agencies such as the Bank of Thailand, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT)?
Given the committee’s broad mandate — from proposing an AI masterplan to enforcing measures enacted by new laws — shouldn’t it include a more diverse group of stakeholders?
For example, since AI holds tremendous potential in processing medical data, shouldn’t healthcare professionals have a voice on the committee?
Data safety is another paramount concern, especially at a time when breaches of personal data and online frauds or scams have become routine issues.
Meanwhile, the draft law’s provision for the committee to promote AI literacy in both the public and private sectors could create conflict.
Will the legislation supersede personal data protection laws? If that is the case, will it be fair to consumers and the general public? Are there enough guardrails to prevent data breaches and abuses?
Misinformation will inevitably also spike alongside the rise in use of AI applications. Will the policy to educate the public, as required by the bill, be adequate to combat it?
It is obvious that this pivotal AI draft law encompasses many more issues than merely economic efficiency. That is why it deserves thorough public scrutiny in multiple hearings before implementation.
The country does not need a hastily drafted law but a balanced regulatory framework that promotes innovation while protecting citizens’ rights, ensuring fair labour transitions and preventing the concentration of AI benefits among select sectors.