That's the stark warning from Bronwyn Howell , a telecommunications and public policy researcher at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, who spoke on a recent webinar arranged by the University of South Africa Unisa.
Howell's view is based on research done with AI development firms and regulatory authorities in Washington, DC earlier this year while she was on research and study leave from the university.
"The question we must ask is this are we trying to create something to regulate not a real harm that we are aware of but a feared harm by stopping anyone from actually going into the jungle in the first place? Are we using regulation to assuage anxious consumers that we are seen to be doing something before we fully understand it? Have we overreacted when it would have been better to wait and gather more information?"
Howell is critical of the "risk management approach" taken by US and EU regulators on AI. The EU AI Act defines risk as "the combination of the probability of an occurrence of harm and the severity of that harm". However, Howell argues that when it comes to AI, regulators are not dealing with risk per se , but rather with the more complex world of uncertainty.
Steyn is part of a working group of experts from various industries that is preparing an advisory report to government that may influence how South Africa regulates AI. He said the EU AI Act is a sound law on the subject and South African legislation should take a similar approach.
