Retaining Superior Intelligence: The Role of Regulators

By Babatunde Olafisoye Esq. (Technology Lawyer)

Introduction:

I have often wondered which would be superior in the coming
years, Human Intelligence or Artificial Intelligence, and a key
contemplation on this subject is which would take control over the
other? We have heard experts repeatedly talk about how Artificial
Intelligence has significantly been integrated into our daily
lives, and any attempt by us to thwart this integration, if at all
remotely possible, would be akin to reversion to the dark ages
again.

To give us a glimpse of what we could expect, a lot of movies
have stretched our imagination on the extent to which this
technology is going to affect everything and anything. A recent
movie that is quite related to this subject is the Hollywood
blockbuster; Godzilla Vs Kong. The movie which was directed by Adam
Wingard illustrates a battle for supremacy between two Alpha
mythical beings called “Titans”. A group called APEX in a bid to
prove that humans must remain superior created a giant robot
(Mechagodzilla) to battle these titans and we know how the robot
fared in the end.

The boggling questions then are; are we superior? If yes, can we
stay superior? If no, how can we come back on top? In all these, a
critical role amongst key stakeholders that must not be overlooked
and cannot be overstressed is the role of Regulators.

This piece critically discusses the concepts of intelligence
vis-a-vis the meanings of both artificial and human intelligence,
the interconnection that underlies their functionality in the
general scale of our existence, the grapple for supremacy and what
it portends for the future, as well as the indispensable role of
regulators in finding a workable balance between them.

What is Intelligence?

Biologically speaking, a narrow and simplistic way to define
Intelligence is that it is the ability to think, to learn from
experience, to solve problems, and adapt to new situations. Think
about our world and the several unique creatures in it. We can
agree, unbiased, that humans are the most complexly intelligent
creatures currently roaming this planet. We have even figured out a
way to measure our intelligence, including that of other animals
just to prove that we are more intelligent. There are significant
gaps, in terms of intelligence and complexity between the brains of
a worm, a chicken, an ape, and an adult human. However, in recent
times we see a potential contender — Artificial Intelligence
(AI).

What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

AI just like every concept is devoid of a uniform definition.
However, in simple terms, Investopedia concisely expressed it to
mean “the simulation of human intelligence in machines that are
programmed to think like humans and mimic their actions.” Let’s
agree for our purpose that “Intelligence” is purely about
information processing and the faster and more efficiently an
entity can process information to give a precise result, the more
intelligent that entity is.

An undeniable attribute of this human creation called Artificial
Intelligence is that it is already performing more highly efficient
and accurate specific operations than humans can perform, and we
are certain that these specific creations, pieced together, will
very soon surpass human intelligence. We simply are working on the
tools that will create a foundation for the (true, “Super
Intelligent”) AI.

For a comprehensive understanding, in terms of complexity, there
are different forms of AI.

These different forms are either Strong AI or Weak AI. The
results of creating software and algorithms under these categories
have brought about categorising AI as Reactive Machines, Limited
Memory, Theory of Mind, Self-aware, Artificial Narrow Intelligence
(where we currently are), Artificial General Intelligence, and
Artificial Superintelligence.

I will not argue whether or not we are at the brink of an “Age
of Ultron” scenario, I would however agree that we are slowly
reaching the level of creating such an intricately mesmerising
entity. With Machine Learning at its full potential, we will
witness AI on a seamless autopilot. But before we get there, our
imaginations can only run wild on the extra opium fed to it by
Hollywood Thriller movies.

Limiting our experience to what we have today, mostly Artificial
Narrow Intelligence, we see our computers increasingly perform
simple tasks better than we normally would. Take for instance your
Google Maps, it practically knows every street name, how to get
there and approximately how long it would take to get there.
Relying on a similar information database are self-driving cars and
semi-autonomous drones, these technologies have in some cases
proven to make better judgements than their human counterparts.

We must not fail to mention AlphaGo — the highlight of AI
development history. AlphaGo, a Google DeepMind^[1] project is an AI agent
that is specialized to play Go (a Chinese strategy board game)
against human competitors. In a test, after 72 hours of supervised
learning, the AI beat the human world champion, Kie Jie. The next
even more significant move was the creation of AlphaGo Zero. This
AI was capable of teaching itself to play the game and after much
practise against itself, beat its predecessor.

Another significant example of this type of AI is Sophia^[2]. Sophia is a realistic
humanoid robot capable of displaying human-like expressions and
interacting with people. While a few writers have oversimplified
its existence to be like a chatbot with a face, it truly is a
wonder to observe. It is even a citizen of Saudi Arabia. I like to
call it the marriage between AI and Robotics [maybe a pre-evolved
Ultron].

Perhaps the most significant development in this AI form is
OpenAI^[3]’s GPT-3^[4]. GPT-3 is a creation of
OpenAI, a research business co-founded by Elon Musk and has been
described as the most important and useful advance in AI for years.
This AI is capable of generating an essay in a few seconds,
answering any question, generating music, creating designs, and
building software components, translating to and from a variety of
languages, knows billions of words, and is even capable of coding!
Because of all the data GPT-3 has at hand, it requires no further
training to fulfil language tasks.^[1]
Put simply; it’s an AI that is better at creating content that has
a language structure – human or machine language – than anything
that has come before it.^[2]

The Risks and Control Mechanisms

Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk share similar thoughts on
Superintelligent AI being the greatest feat man could ever attain,
however, it could be the ultimate cause of our extinction if not
properly checked and managed.

As Elon Musk puts it, “AI will be the best or worst thing
ever for humanity.” The reassuring thing about the level of AI
development we have today is that it is currently not capable of
engineering itself and it is nowhere near human intelligence. And
while we are still far away from what would potentially evolve into
Artificial Super Intelligence, what we have today is only narrow,
can only process huge amounts of data and provide results on
specific tasks with little or no human intervention. Consequently,
I believe the technology is at its incubation. It is then
imperative that this technology along with its infinite
possibilities be properly understood and in the best way, regulated
so as to prevent the risks of a rogue or runaway Super
Intelligence. In other words, control it from its infancy.

On preventing the technology from eventually causing our
extinction, several solutions have been theorised. One of such
solutions is to isolate the technology and keep it confined in a
“box”. This could mean isolating it from accessing the internet,
limiting its contact with the outside world. The problem this would
inevitably birth is a great reduction of its ability to perform the
functions for which it was created.

Another solution is to design a “theoretical containment
algorithm” to ensure that an artificial intelligence “cannot harm
people under any circumstances.” However, an analysis of the
current computing paradigm showed that no such singular algorithm
can be created. Another one that is radical but seems to be working
is implanting this technology in human brains. This will facilitate
an efficient control of the technology.

Regulations and the Roles of Regulators

Whichever way we decide to solve this problem, one key aspect
must not be overlooked — the role of Regulators. We have seen good
attempts by various jurisdictions to keep up with regulating the
emerging trends in technology and more particularly, Artificial
Intelligence. Some countries have managed to develop regulations
and guidelines targeted towards ensuring that the wide haze of AI
is kept under close watch while still adapting it to meet the
crucial and ever-expanding human needs as the world dives into the
future.

In June 2018 the European Commission set up the independent
High-Level Expert Group on AI to provide guidelines on how AI can
achieve a unique degree of reliability.

In light of the guidelines, the Commission has since published
its own ‘White Paper on Artificial Intelligence – A
European approach to excellence and trust^[5]
– on 19 February 2020. The Commission’s White Paper outlined that
the most alarming risks to be addressed concerning AI are those it
poses to the landscape of fundamental rights, the privacy of data,
safety and effective performance, and liability identification. The
Commission insists that the optimal method of regulation should be
risk-based to ensure that reactions to AI development are
commensurate with and do not stifle innovation.

In place of proposing regulations at this level, the Commission
has laid out some legal requirements which must be captured by any
regulatory framework to ensure that AI continues to be dependable,
and subjective to the values and principles of the European
Union.

Following this White Paper, the EU recently projected that its
draft regulation will be released on 21 April 2021.

On 21 April 2021, the European Commission adopted a proposal for
a regulation of AI Systems, one which it describes as “the
first-ever legal framework on AI.”  The AI Regulation will
impose significant obligations impacting businesses across many, if
not all, sectors of the economy.  The AI Regulation will prove
controversial, touching off a legislative battle lasting at least
until 2022.

The proposed AI Regulation will join other ambitious EU
initiatives in the digital sector, such as the Data Governance Act,
Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, currently working
their way through the EU legislative process, as well as the
forthcoming Data Act and the ongoing reform of EU antitrust policy.
Some of the AI Regulation provisions read across to related
provisions in other measures – for example, the practices
prohibited for all AI systems (see below) are related to the
Digital Services Act measures to combat harmful content on the
Internet.

The AI Regulation defines “AI systems” broadly and imposes
tailored obligations on actors at different parts of the value
chain, from “providers” of AI systems to manufacturers, importers,
distributors and users.  The AI Regulation imposes especially
strict obligations concerning “high-risk AI systems.”

On the other hand, the AI Regulation includes several provisions
intended to promote the development and uptake of AI systems in the
European Union (EU).  The AI Regulation also creates a new
regulatory framework, with a European Artificial Intelligence Board
overseeing and coordinating enforcement. The AI Regulation
envisages a two-year period for application following adoption and
publication of the final regulation, meaning that the new
requirements could apply as early as 2024.^[3]

United States lawmakers and regulators have mainly pursued AI in
the area of autonomous or self-driving vehicles. The Department of
Transportation is investigating what elements must be considered in
drafting regulations for the use of such vehicles, including
multi-vehicle convoys, and several states have adopted legislation
and regulations allowing for the testing of autonomous vehicles.
Also, recent federal legislation has tasked part of the Department
of Defense with the responsibility of crafting policies for the
development and deployment of AI systems as they concern national
defence.

In the 115th Congress, thirty-nine bills have been introduced
that have the phrase “artificial intelligence” in the text of the
bill. Four of these bills have been enacted into law. Section 238
of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2019 directs the Department of Defense to undertake several
activities regarding AI.^[4]

General Discussions on regulation of AI in the United States
have included topics such as the timeliness of regulating AI, the
nature of the federal regulatory framework to govern and promote
AI, including what agency should lead, the regulatory and governing
powers of that agency, and how to update regulations in the face of
rapidly changing technology, as well as the roles of state
governments and courts.

In January 2019, following an Executive Order on Maintaining
American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence, the White House’s
Office of Science and Technology Policy released a draft Guidance
for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications, which
includes ten principles for United States agencies when deciding
whether and how to regulate AI.^[5]

In May 2018, the Trump Administration held a summit on AI
technologies for industry, academia and government
participants.  At this conference, White House officials
outlined the following four core goals of the U.S. government
concerning AI technologies: (i) maintaining American AI leadership;
(ii) supporting American workers; (iii) an increased focus on
research and development; and (iv) removing barriers to
innovation.  In February 2019, President Trump followed up on
these previously stated goals by signing an executive order to
create the “American AI Initiative”, which, amongst other things,
directs heads of federal agencies to budget an “appropriate” amount
of funding for AI research and development.^[6]

Australia has been and remains a leading participator in the
ongoing discourse on the regulation of AI, attracting different
bodies seeking to provide comments as to the optimal model to AI
regulation:

The Australian Human Rights Commission equally published a White
Paper in 2019 calling for comments on the proposed method of
regulation. The paper proposes that a separate regulatory body be
established, either out of an existing organisation or an entirely
new body, to be known as a ‘Responsible Innovation Organisation’.
This body would be saddled with the mandate of guiding the approach
to AI and likely be conferred with enforcement powers to see to it
that AI is put to appropriate use, in line with Australian law and
some vital governing principles

As it stands, however, Australia has also no specific regulatory
framework for the development and use of AI and therefore placing
heavy reliance on the existing legislation and standards pending
when new standards will be birthed. It appears that given the depth
of discussion papers and the existence of a current set of AI
principles, Australia may not be a long way off an AI-specific
regulatory cum legislative instrument.

The UK has queued up in taking an affirmative step to the
development of AI, with a concentration on the encouragement of
innovation in the sector.

In February 2020, the Committee on Standards in Public Life
published ‘Artificial Intelligence and Public Standards’ commenting
on the role of public standards in the AI sector. According to the
Committee, the current tools and principles established in the UK
are sufficient to encapsulate the risks that come with AI
development. It is not a matter of establishing new regulatory
bodies and laws but instead clarifying and tweaking current laws
and standards so they can be more clearly applied to circumstances
involving AI.

The UK government recently established the Centre for Data
Ethics and Innovation (CDEI) as a specific statutory body aimed at
researching issues of AI and its regulation. The CDEI often
publishes papers and reports on the status of AI regulation within
the UK on their website.

In July 2017, China’s State Council released the Next Generation
Artificial Intelligence Development Plan (Development Plan). The
Development Plan sets forth long-term strategic goals for AI
development in China, concluding in 2030. It contains “guarantee
measures,” such as developing a regulatory system and strengthening
intellectual property protection, in promoting AI development.
Regulation of the issues of ethical and legal support for the
development of AI is nascent, but policy ensures state control of
Chinese companies and over valuable data, including storage of data
on Chinese users within the country and the mandatory use of
People’s Republic of China’s national standards for AI, including
over big data, cloud computing, and industrial software. The
Development Plan comprises three stages, concluding in 2020, 2025,
and 2030, respectively, and sets forth goals concerning building a
regulatory framework and ethics framework for each stage. ^[7]

An in-depth analysis exposes an interaction between Artificial
Intelligence in Nigeria and the Copyright Act. AI-related
applications will usually run on software. However, it is important
to note that there are no provisions for the protection of software
under the Copyright Act in Nigeria.

Copyright protection arguably only extends to the original
documented expression of the software. This original expression
does not extend to the functionality of the software. It is only
limited to the blueprint either in audio, written or any other form
permissible by the Copyright Act as being protectable
thereunder.

Any sufficiently transformative technology is going to require
new laws. This, therefore, means that the rapidly advancing area of
artificial intelligence will require a new field of law and new
regulations. Artificial development is developing fast and needs to
be regulated, as it is, there is little or nothing on the
regulation of AI in the world and Nigeria particularly. As stated
in the previous section efforts are being made by the European
Union to ensure that a new category of persons ‘electronic persons’
are created to cater for artificial intelligence and robots. This
is laudable as it will create a platform to attribute rights and
obligations to AI systems and robots. The application of Artificial
Intelligence in Nigeria is still at an infancy stage and the
deployment of AI in the administration of Intellectual Property and
other spheres of law in Nigeria in a few years may happen sooner
than we think. These may be centred around the Law of Torts to
handle liabilities arising out of wrongful acts of these machines,
fundamental rights, contracts law, Data Protection, Anti-Terrorism
and Technology Law among others.

But like any other technology, AI is a double-edged sword.
According to futurist Ray Kurzweil, “if the technological
singularity happens, then there won’t be a machine takeover.
Instead, we’ll be able to co-exist with AI in a world where
machines reinforce human abilities”. While speaking on AI’s
Existential threat to humanity, Elon Musk said, “AI is a rare
case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation than be
reactive.” And again. “I am not normally an advocate of
regulation and oversight…I think one should generally err on the
side of minimizing those things…but this is a case where you have a
very serious danger to the public.”

Though we are years away from ASI, researchers predict that the
leap from AGI to ASI will be a short one. No one knows when the
first sentient computer life form is going to arrive. But as Narrow
AI gets increasingly sophisticated and capable, we can begin to
envision a future that is driven by both machines and humans; one
in which we are much more intelligent, conscious, and
self-aware.^[8]

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, one way to move forward in terms of regulating AI
to ultimately prevent it from causing harm to man is for us to
proactively create comprehensive regulations both locally and
globally to control the creation and application of this
technology. The key control issue is responsibility. We cannot
always count on expert groups to stay responsible with their
creations. As a result, we must timeously create regulations that
will balance the interest of the public and innovators. A globally
agreed set of rules cannot be overlooked also. We can have an
international body where all countries can be represented and this
body will be responsible for creating rules that will strike a
balance between the interests of the public and innovators, the
ultimate goal being to keep us in control of our creation.

^[1] Clockwise Software, “GPT-3 Is Only
the Beginning: Intro to Language Model’s Capabilities” (Clockwise
Software, December 2020) <https://clockwise.software/blog/what-is-gpt-3/^[6]> Last accessed
14 April 2021

^[2] Bernard Marr, “What is GPT-3 and why
is it revolutionising Artificial Intelligence?” (Forbes, October
2020) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2020/10/05/what-is-gpt-3-and-why-is-it-revolutionizing-artificial-intelligence/?sh=1fd1c3f7481a^[7]> Last accessed
15 April 2020

^[3] Norton Rose Fulbright, “EU proposes
new Artificial Intelligence Regulation” (Norton Rose Fulbright,
April 2021) <https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/fdfc4c27/eu-to-propose-new-artificial-intelligence-regulation^[8]> Last Accessed
23 April 2021

^[4] Library of Congress, “Regulation of
Artificial Intelligence: The Americas and the Caribbean” (LOC,
December 2020) <https://www.loc.gov/law/help/artificial-intelligence/americas.php#_ftn67^[9]> Last Accessed 17
April 2021

^[5]  Lee Tiedrich, “AI Update: White
House Issues 10 Principles for Artificial Intelligence Regulation”
(Inside Tech Media, January 2020) <https://www.insidetechmedia.com/2020/01/14/ai-update-white-house-issues-10-principles-for-artificial-intelligence-regulation^[10]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[6] Nathan Greene, David Higbee, Brett
Schlossberg, “Ai, Machine Learning & Big Data 2020 | USA” (Global
Legal Insights, 2020) <https://www.globallegalinsights.com/practice-areas/ai-machine-learning-and-big-data-laws-and-regulations/usa^[11]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[7] The Library of Congress, “Regulation
of Artificial Intelligence: East/South Asia and the Pacific” (LOC,
December 2020) <https://www.loc.gov/law/help/artificial-intelligence/asia-pacific.php#_ftn30^[12]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[8] Tanya D. Jajal “Distinguishing
between Narrow AI, General AI and Super AI” (Medium, May 2018)
<https://medium.com/mapping-out-2050/distinguishing-between-narrow-ai-general-ai-and-super-ai-a4bc44172e22^[13]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

By Babatunde Olafisoye Esq. (Technology Lawyer)

Introduction:

I have often wondered which would be superior in the coming
years, Human Intelligence or Artificial Intelligence, and a key
contemplation on this subject is which would take control over the
other? We have heard experts repeatedly talk about how Artificial
Intelligence has significantly been integrated into our daily
lives, and any attempt by us to thwart this integration, if at all
remotely possible, would be akin to reversion to the dark ages
again.

To give us a glimpse of what we could expect, a lot of movies
have stretched our imagination on the extent to which this
technology is going to affect everything and anything. A recent
movie that is quite related to this subject is the Hollywood
blockbuster; Godzilla Vs Kong. The movie which was directed by Adam
Wingard illustrates a battle for supremacy between two Alpha
mythical beings called “Titans”. A group called APEX in a bid to
prove that humans must remain superior created a giant robot
(Mechagodzilla) to battle these titans and we know how the robot
fared in the end.

The boggling questions then are; are we superior? If yes, can we
stay superior? If no, how can we come back on top? In all these, a
critical role amongst key stakeholders that must not be overlooked
and cannot be overstressed is the role of Regulators.

This piece critically discusses the concepts of intelligence
vis-a-vis the meanings of both artificial and human intelligence,
the interconnection that underlies their functionality in the
general scale of our existence, the grapple for supremacy and what
it portends for the future, as well as the indispensable role of
regulators in finding a workable balance between them.

What is Intelligence?

Biologically speaking, a narrow and simplistic way to define
Intelligence is that it is the ability to think, to learn from
experience, to solve problems, and adapt to new situations. Think
about our world and the several unique creatures in it. We can
agree, unbiased, that humans are the most complexly intelligent
creatures currently roaming this planet. We have even figured out a
way to measure our intelligence, including that of other animals
just to prove that we are more intelligent. There are significant
gaps, in terms of intelligence and complexity between the brains of
a worm, a chicken, an ape, and an adult human. However, in recent
times we see a potential contender — Artificial Intelligence
(AI).

What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

AI just like every concept is devoid of a uniform definition.
However, in simple terms, Investopedia concisely expressed it to
mean “the simulation of human intelligence in machines that are
programmed to think like humans and mimic their actions.” Let’s
agree for our purpose that “Intelligence” is purely about
information processing and the faster and more efficiently an
entity can process information to give a precise result, the more
intelligent that entity is.

An undeniable attribute of this human creation called Artificial
Intelligence is that it is already performing more highly efficient
and accurate specific operations than humans can perform, and we
are certain that these specific creations, pieced together, will
very soon surpass human intelligence. We simply are working on the
tools that will create a foundation for the (true, “Super
Intelligent”) AI.

For a comprehensive understanding, in terms of complexity, there
are different forms of AI.

These different forms are either Strong AI or Weak AI. The
results of creating software and algorithms under these categories
have brought about categorising AI as Reactive Machines, Limited
Memory, Theory of Mind, Self-aware, Artificial Narrow Intelligence
(where we currently are), Artificial General Intelligence, and
Artificial Superintelligence.

I will not argue whether or not we are at the brink of an “Age
of Ultron” scenario, I would however agree that we are slowly
reaching the level of creating such an intricately mesmerising
entity. With Machine Learning at its full potential, we will
witness AI on a seamless autopilot. But before we get there, our
imaginations can only run wild on the extra opium fed to it by
Hollywood Thriller movies.

Limiting our experience to what we have today, mostly Artificial
Narrow Intelligence, we see our computers increasingly perform
simple tasks better than we normally would. Take for instance your
Google Maps, it practically knows every street name, how to get
there and approximately how long it would take to get there.
Relying on a similar information database are self-driving cars and
semi-autonomous drones, these technologies have in some cases
proven to make better judgements than their human counterparts.

We must not fail to mention AlphaGo — the highlight of AI
development history. AlphaGo, a Google DeepMind^[1] project is an AI agent
that is specialized to play Go (a Chinese strategy board game)
against human competitors. In a test, after 72 hours of supervised
learning, the AI beat the human world champion, Kie Jie. The next
even more significant move was the creation of AlphaGo Zero. This
AI was capable of teaching itself to play the game and after much
practise against itself, beat its predecessor.

Another significant example of this type of AI is Sophia^[2]. Sophia is a realistic
humanoid robot capable of displaying human-like expressions and
interacting with people. While a few writers have oversimplified
its existence to be like a chatbot with a face, it truly is a
wonder to observe. It is even a citizen of Saudi Arabia. I like to
call it the marriage between AI and Robotics [maybe a pre-evolved
Ultron].

Perhaps the most significant development in this AI form is
OpenAI^[3]’s GPT-3^[4]. GPT-3 is a creation of
OpenAI, a research business co-founded by Elon Musk and has been
described as the most important and useful advance in AI for years.
This AI is capable of generating an essay in a few seconds,
answering any question, generating music, creating designs, and
building software components, translating to and from a variety of
languages, knows billions of words, and is even capable of coding!
Because of all the data GPT-3 has at hand, it requires no further
training to fulfil language tasks.^[1]
Put simply; it’s an AI that is better at creating content that has
a language structure – human or machine language – than anything
that has come before it.^[2]

The Risks and Control Mechanisms

Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk share similar thoughts on
Superintelligent AI being the greatest feat man could ever attain,
however, it could be the ultimate cause of our extinction if not
properly checked and managed.

As Elon Musk puts it, “AI will be the best or worst thing
ever for humanity.” The reassuring thing about the level of AI
development we have today is that it is currently not capable of
engineering itself and it is nowhere near human intelligence. And
while we are still far away from what would potentially evolve into
Artificial Super Intelligence, what we have today is only narrow,
can only process huge amounts of data and provide results on
specific tasks with little or no human intervention. Consequently,
I believe the technology is at its incubation. It is then
imperative that this technology along with its infinite
possibilities be properly understood and in the best way, regulated
so as to prevent the risks of a rogue or runaway Super
Intelligence. In other words, control it from its infancy.

On preventing the technology from eventually causing our
extinction, several solutions have been theorised. One of such
solutions is to isolate the technology and keep it confined in a
“box”. This could mean isolating it from accessing the internet,
limiting its contact with the outside world. The problem this would
inevitably birth is a great reduction of its ability to perform the
functions for which it was created.

Another solution is to design a “theoretical containment
algorithm” to ensure that an artificial intelligence “cannot harm
people under any circumstances.” However, an analysis of the
current computing paradigm showed that no such singular algorithm
can be created. Another one that is radical but seems to be working
is implanting this technology in human brains. This will facilitate
an efficient control of the technology.

Regulations and the Roles of Regulators

Whichever way we decide to solve this problem, one key aspect
must not be overlooked — the role of Regulators. We have seen good
attempts by various jurisdictions to keep up with regulating the
emerging trends in technology and more particularly, Artificial
Intelligence. Some countries have managed to develop regulations
and guidelines targeted towards ensuring that the wide haze of AI
is kept under close watch while still adapting it to meet the
crucial and ever-expanding human needs as the world dives into the
future.

In June 2018 the European Commission set up the independent
High-Level Expert Group on AI to provide guidelines on how AI can
achieve a unique degree of reliability.

In light of the guidelines, the Commission has since published
its own ‘White Paper on Artificial Intelligence – A
European approach to excellence and trust^[5]
– on 19 February 2020. The Commission’s White Paper outlined that
the most alarming risks to be addressed concerning AI are those it
poses to the landscape of fundamental rights, the privacy of data,
safety and effective performance, and liability identification. The
Commission insists that the optimal method of regulation should be
risk-based to ensure that reactions to AI development are
commensurate with and do not stifle innovation.

In place of proposing regulations at this level, the Commission
has laid out some legal requirements which must be captured by any
regulatory framework to ensure that AI continues to be dependable,
and subjective to the values and principles of the European
Union.

Following this White Paper, the EU recently projected that its
draft regulation will be released on 21 April 2021.

On 21 April 2021, the European Commission adopted a proposal for
a regulation of AI Systems, one which it describes as “the
first-ever legal framework on AI.”  The AI Regulation will
impose significant obligations impacting businesses across many, if
not all, sectors of the economy.  The AI Regulation will prove
controversial, touching off a legislative battle lasting at least
until 2022.

The proposed AI Regulation will join other ambitious EU
initiatives in the digital sector, such as the Data Governance Act,
Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, currently working
their way through the EU legislative process, as well as the
forthcoming Data Act and the ongoing reform of EU antitrust policy.
Some of the AI Regulation provisions read across to related
provisions in other measures – for example, the practices
prohibited for all AI systems (see below) are related to the
Digital Services Act measures to combat harmful content on the
Internet.

The AI Regulation defines “AI systems” broadly and imposes
tailored obligations on actors at different parts of the value
chain, from “providers” of AI systems to manufacturers, importers,
distributors and users.  The AI Regulation imposes especially
strict obligations concerning “high-risk AI systems.”

On the other hand, the AI Regulation includes several provisions
intended to promote the development and uptake of AI systems in the
European Union (EU).  The AI Regulation also creates a new
regulatory framework, with a European Artificial Intelligence Board
overseeing and coordinating enforcement. The AI Regulation
envisages a two-year period for application following adoption and
publication of the final regulation, meaning that the new
requirements could apply as early as 2024.^[3]

United States lawmakers and regulators have mainly pursued AI in
the area of autonomous or self-driving vehicles. The Department of
Transportation is investigating what elements must be considered in
drafting regulations for the use of such vehicles, including
multi-vehicle convoys, and several states have adopted legislation
and regulations allowing for the testing of autonomous vehicles.
Also, recent federal legislation has tasked part of the Department
of Defense with the responsibility of crafting policies for the
development and deployment of AI systems as they concern national
defence.

In the 115th Congress, thirty-nine bills have been introduced
that have the phrase “artificial intelligence” in the text of the
bill. Four of these bills have been enacted into law. Section 238
of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2019 directs the Department of Defense to undertake several
activities regarding AI.^[4]

General Discussions on regulation of AI in the United States
have included topics such as the timeliness of regulating AI, the
nature of the federal regulatory framework to govern and promote
AI, including what agency should lead, the regulatory and governing
powers of that agency, and how to update regulations in the face of
rapidly changing technology, as well as the roles of state
governments and courts.

In January 2019, following an Executive Order on Maintaining
American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence, the White House’s
Office of Science and Technology Policy released a draft Guidance
for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications, which
includes ten principles for United States agencies when deciding
whether and how to regulate AI.^[5]

In May 2018, the Trump Administration held a summit on AI
technologies for industry, academia and government
participants.  At this conference, White House officials
outlined the following four core goals of the U.S. government
concerning AI technologies: (i) maintaining American AI leadership;
(ii) supporting American workers; (iii) an increased focus on
research and development; and (iv) removing barriers to
innovation.  In February 2019, President Trump followed up on
these previously stated goals by signing an executive order to
create the “American AI Initiative”, which, amongst other things,
directs heads of federal agencies to budget an “appropriate” amount
of funding for AI research and development.^[6]

Australia has been and remains a leading participator in the
ongoing discourse on the regulation of AI, attracting different
bodies seeking to provide comments as to the optimal model to AI
regulation:

The Australian Human Rights Commission equally published a White
Paper in 2019 calling for comments on the proposed method of
regulation. The paper proposes that a separate regulatory body be
established, either out of an existing organisation or an entirely
new body, to be known as a ‘Responsible Innovation Organisation’.
This body would be saddled with the mandate of guiding the approach
to AI and likely be conferred with enforcement powers to see to it
that AI is put to appropriate use, in line with Australian law and
some vital governing principles

As it stands, however, Australia has also no specific regulatory
framework for the development and use of AI and therefore placing
heavy reliance on the existing legislation and standards pending
when new standards will be birthed. It appears that given the depth
of discussion papers and the existence of a current set of AI
principles, Australia may not be a long way off an AI-specific
regulatory cum legislative instrument.

The UK has queued up in taking an affirmative step to the
development of AI, with a concentration on the encouragement of
innovation in the sector.

In February 2020, the Committee on Standards in Public Life
published ‘Artificial Intelligence and Public Standards’ commenting
on the role of public standards in the AI sector. According to the
Committee, the current tools and principles established in the UK
are sufficient to encapsulate the risks that come with AI
development. It is not a matter of establishing new regulatory
bodies and laws but instead clarifying and tweaking current laws
and standards so they can be more clearly applied to circumstances
involving AI.

The UK government recently established the Centre for Data
Ethics and Innovation (CDEI) as a specific statutory body aimed at
researching issues of AI and its regulation. The CDEI often
publishes papers and reports on the status of AI regulation within
the UK on their website.

In July 2017, China’s State Council released the Next Generation
Artificial Intelligence Development Plan (Development Plan). The
Development Plan sets forth long-term strategic goals for AI
development in China, concluding in 2030. It contains “guarantee
measures,” such as developing a regulatory system and strengthening
intellectual property protection, in promoting AI development.
Regulation of the issues of ethical and legal support for the
development of AI is nascent, but policy ensures state control of
Chinese companies and over valuable data, including storage of data
on Chinese users within the country and the mandatory use of
People’s Republic of China’s national standards for AI, including
over big data, cloud computing, and industrial software. The
Development Plan comprises three stages, concluding in 2020, 2025,
and 2030, respectively, and sets forth goals concerning building a
regulatory framework and ethics framework for each stage. ^[7]

An in-depth analysis exposes an interaction between Artificial
Intelligence in Nigeria and the Copyright Act. AI-related
applications will usually run on software. However, it is important
to note that there are no provisions for the protection of software
under the Copyright Act in Nigeria.

Copyright protection arguably only extends to the original
documented expression of the software. This original expression
does not extend to the functionality of the software. It is only
limited to the blueprint either in audio, written or any other form
permissible by the Copyright Act as being protectable
thereunder.

Any sufficiently transformative technology is going to require
new laws. This, therefore, means that the rapidly advancing area of
artificial intelligence will require a new field of law and new
regulations. Artificial development is developing fast and needs to
be regulated, as it is, there is little or nothing on the
regulation of AI in the world and Nigeria particularly. As stated
in the previous section efforts are being made by the European
Union to ensure that a new category of persons ‘electronic persons’
are created to cater for artificial intelligence and robots. This
is laudable as it will create a platform to attribute rights and
obligations to AI systems and robots. The application of Artificial
Intelligence in Nigeria is still at an infancy stage and the
deployment of AI in the administration of Intellectual Property and
other spheres of law in Nigeria in a few years may happen sooner
than we think. These may be centred around the Law of Torts to
handle liabilities arising out of wrongful acts of these machines,
fundamental rights, contracts law, Data Protection, Anti-Terrorism
and Technology Law among others.

But like any other technology, AI is a double-edged sword.
According to futurist Ray Kurzweil, “if the technological
singularity happens, then there won’t be a machine takeover.
Instead, we’ll be able to co-exist with AI in a world where
machines reinforce human abilities”. While speaking on AI’s
Existential threat to humanity, Elon Musk said, “AI is a rare
case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation than be
reactive.” And again. “I am not normally an advocate of
regulation and oversight…I think one should generally err on the
side of minimizing those things…but this is a case where you have a
very serious danger to the public.”

Though we are years away from ASI, researchers predict that the
leap from AGI to ASI will be a short one. No one knows when the
first sentient computer life form is going to arrive. But as Narrow
AI gets increasingly sophisticated and capable, we can begin to
envision a future that is driven by both machines and humans; one
in which we are much more intelligent, conscious, and
self-aware.^[8]

CONCLUSION

In my opinion, one way to move forward in terms of regulating AI
to ultimately prevent it from causing harm to man is for us to
proactively create comprehensive regulations both locally and
globally to control the creation and application of this
technology. The key control issue is responsibility. We cannot
always count on expert groups to stay responsible with their
creations. As a result, we must timeously create regulations that
will balance the interest of the public and innovators. A globally
agreed set of rules cannot be overlooked also. We can have an
international body where all countries can be represented and this
body will be responsible for creating rules that will strike a
balance between the interests of the public and innovators, the
ultimate goal being to keep us in control of our creation.

^[1] Clockwise Software, “GPT-3 Is
Only the Beginning: Intro to Language Model’s Capabilities”
(Clockwise Software, December 2020) <https://clockwise.software/blog/what-is-gpt-3/^[6]> Last accessed
14 April 2021

^[2] Bernard Marr, “What is GPT-3 and
why is it revolutionising Artificial Intelligence?” (Forbes,
October 2020) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2020/10/05/what-is-gpt-3-and-why-is-it-revolutionizing-artificial-intelligence/?sh=1fd1c3f7481a^[7]> Last accessed
15 April 2020

^[3] Norton Rose Fulbright, “EU
proposes new Artificial Intelligence Regulation” (Norton Rose
Fulbright, April 2021) <https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/fdfc4c27/eu-to-propose-new-artificial-intelligence-regulation^[8]> Last Accessed
23 April 2021

^[4] Library of Congress, “Regulation
of Artificial Intelligence: The Americas and the Caribbean” (LOC,
December 2020) <https://www.loc.gov/law/help/artificial-intelligence/americas.php#_ftn67^[9]> Last Accessed 17
April 2021

^[5]  Lee Tiedrich, “AI Update:
White House Issues 10 Principles for Artificial Intelligence
Regulation” (Inside Tech Media, January 2020) <https://www.insidetechmedia.com/2020/01/14/ai-update-white-house-issues-10-principles-for-artificial-intelligence-regulation^[10]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[6] Nathan Greene, David Higbee,
Brett Schlossberg, “Ai, Machine Learning & Big Data 2020 | USA”
(Global Legal Insights, 2020) <https://www.globallegalinsights.com/practice-areas/ai-machine-learning-and-big-data-laws-and-regulations/usa^[11]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[7] The Library of Congress,
“Regulation of Artificial Intelligence: East/South Asia and the
Pacific” (LOC, December 2020) <https://www.loc.gov/law/help/artificial-intelligence/asia-pacific.php#_ftn30^[12]> Last accessed
17 April 2021

^[8] Tanya D. Jajal “Distinguishing
between Narrow AI, General AI and Super AI” (Medium, May 2018)
<https://medium.com/mapping-out-2050/distinguishing-between-narrow-ai-general-ai-and-super-ai-a4bc44172e22^[13]> Last accessed
17 April 2021