Connect with us

World

Marathon EU talks fail to reach deal on Artificial Intelligence Act

Published

on

Marathon EU talks fail to reach deal on Artificial Intelligence Act

The European Parliament and member states failed on Thursday to reach a political deal on the Artificial Intelligence Act following marathon talks in Brussels that stretched over 22 hours. Negotiations will resume on Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

The negotiations began on Wednesday afternoon, went into the entire night, continued during the morning and concluded on Thursday afternoon, with an agenda that reportedly featured over 23 items, reflecting the extreme technicality of the issue at hand.

The Act is considered the world’s first attempt to regulate artificial intelligence, a technology with an astonishing and often unpredictable capacity to evolve, in a comprehensive, ethics-based and environmentally sustainable manner.

The discussions took place against the backdrop of aggressive lobbying from Big Tech and start-ups, stark warnings from civil society and intense media scrutiny as the legislation from Brussels could well influence state-led efforts across the world.

Mindful of the high stakes, the European Parliament and the Council, which represents member states, vowed to give it a second chance on Friday, starting at 9.00 am.

“Lots of progress made over (the) past 22 hours on the AI Act,” said Thierry Breton, the European Commissioner for the internal market.

Advertisement

Lawmakers who took part in the drawn-out discussions also said considerable progress had been achieved, without providing more details for the sake of confidentiality.

The negotiations were hard-fought bargaining between MEPs and governments over a string of deeply complex questions, most notably the regulation of foundation models that power chatbots like OpenAI’s revolutionary ChatGPT and targeted exceptions for using real-time biometric identification in public spaces.

Despite its impressive and possibly record-breaking length, Thursday’s marathon talks were not enough to go through the entire list of open questions.

Even if Friday’s second try bridges the gaps and brings forth a provisional agreement at the political level, more consultations will likely be required to fine-tune all the technical details. Spain, the current holder of the Council of the EU’s rotating presidency, is tasked with keeping the 27 member states and their wide range of views on the same page.

Once the draft, which covers hundreds of pages in articles and annexes, is rewritten and a consolidated version emerges, it will be sent to the European Parliament for a new vote in the hemicycle, followed by the Council’s final green light.

Advertisement

The law will then have a grace period before it becomes fully enforceable in 2026.

An ever-evolving technology

First presented in April 2021, the AI Act is a ground-breaking attempt to ensure the most radically transformative technology of the 21st century is developed in a human-centric, ethically responsible manner that prevents and contains its most harmful consequences.

The Act is essentially a product safety regulation that imposes a staggered set of rules that companies need to follow before offering their services to consumers anywhere across the bloc’s single market.

The law proposes a pyramid-like structure that splits AI-powered products into four main categories according to the potential risk they pose to the safety of citizens and their fundamental rights: minimal, limited, high and unacceptable.

Those that fall under the minimal risk category will be freed from additional rules, while those labelled as limited risk will have to follow basic transparency obligations.

Advertisement

The systems considered high risk will be subject to stringent rules that will apply before they enter the EU market and throughout their lifetime, including substantial updates. This group will encompass applications that have a direct and potentially life-changing impact on private citizens, such as CV-sorting software for job interviews, robot-assisted surgery and exam-scoring programmes in universities.

High-risk AI products will have to undergo a conformity assessment, be registered in an EU database, sign a declaration of conformity and carry the CE marking – all before they get to consumers. Once they become available, they will be under the oversight of national authorities. Companies that violate the rules will face multi-million fines.

AI systems with an unacceptable risk for society, including social-scoring to control citizens and applications that exploit socio-economic vulnerabilities, will be outright banned across all EU territory.

ADVERTISEMENT

Although this risk-based approach was well received back in 2021, it came under extraordinary pressure in late 2022, when OpenAI launched ChatGPT and triggered a global furore over chatbots. ChatGPT was soon followed by Google’s Bard, Microsoft’s Bing Chat and, most recently, Amazon’s Q.

Chatbots are powered by foundation models, which are trained with vast troves of data, such as text, images, music, speech and code, to fulfil a wide and fluid set of tasks that can change over time, rather than having a specific, unmodifiable purpose.

The Commission’s original proposal did not introduce any provisions for foundation models, forcing lawmakers to add an entirely new article with an extensive list of obligations to ensure these systems respect fundamental rights, are energy efficient and comply with transparency requirements by disclosing their content is AI-generated.

Advertisement

This push from Parliament was met with scepticism from member states, who tend to prefer a soft-touch approach to law-making. Germany, France and Italy, the bloc’s three biggest economies, came forward with a counter-proposal that favoured “mandatory self-regulation through codes of conduct” for foundation models. The move sparked an angry reaction from lawmakers and threatened to derail the legislative process. 

According to Reuters, Thursday’s talks helped co-legislators agree on provisional terms for foundation models. Details on the agreement were not immediately available.

ADVERTISEMENT

A contentious issue that still needs to be resolved is the use of real-time remote biometrics, including facial recognition, in public spaces. Biometrics refers to systems that analyse biological features, such as facial traits, eye structures and fingerprints, to determine a person’s identity, usually without the person’s consent.

Lawmakers are defending a blanket ban on real-time biometric identification and categorisation based on sensitive characteristics like gender, race, ethnicity or political affiliation. Member states, on the other hand, argue exceptions are needed to enable law enforcement to track down criminals and thwart threats to national security.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

World

Blinken says US cannot support Rafah assault without humanitarian plan

Published

on

Blinken says US cannot support Rafah assault without humanitarian plan
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Wednesday he has still not seen a plan for Israel’s planned offensive on the southern Gaza city of Rafah that would protect civilians, repeating that Washington could not support such an assault.
Continue Reading

World

The unexpected announcement of a prime minister divides Haiti's newly created transitional council

Published

on

The unexpected announcement of a prime minister divides Haiti's newly created transitional council

A surprise announcement that revealed Haiti’s new prime minister is threatening to fracture a recently installed transitional council tasked with choosing new leaders for the gang-riddled Caribbean country.

Four of seven council members with voting powers said Tuesday that they had chosen Fritz Bélizaire as prime minister, taking many Haitians aback with their declaration and unexpected political alliance.

HAITI COUNCIL APPOINTS NEW PRIME MINISTER AS COUNTRY CONTINUES TO FACE DEADLY GANG VIOLENCE

The council members who oppose Bélizaire, who served as Haiti’s sports minister during the second presidency of René Préval from 2006 to 2011, are now weighing options including fighting the decision or resigning from the council.

A person with direct knowledge of the situation who did not want to be identified because negotiations are ongoing said the council’s political accord had been violated by the unexpected move and that some council members are considering other choices as potential prime minister.

Advertisement

Edgard Leblanc Fils, left, and Smith Augustin prepare to pose for a group photo with the transitional council after it named Fils as its president in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, Tuesday, April 30, 2024. The transitional council will act as the country’s presidency until it can arrange presidential elections sometime before it disbands, which must be by February 2026.  (AP Photo/Odelyn Joseph)

The council on Tuesday was scheduled to hold an election and choose its president. But two hours and a profuse apology later, one council member said that not only a council president had been chosen, but a prime minister as well. Murmurs rippled through the room.

The Montana Accord, a civil society group represented by a council member with voting powers, denounced in a statement late Tuesday what it called a “complot” hatched by four council members against the Haitian people “in the middle of the night.”

“The political and economic mafia forces have decided to take control of the presidential council and the government so that they can continue to control the state,” the Montana Accord said.

Haitian politics have long been characterized by secretive dealings, but many worry the country cannot afford further political instability as gangs lay siege to the capital of Port-au-Prince and beyond.

Advertisement

“People change parties (like) they’re changing their shirts,” said François Pierre-Louis, a professor of political science at Queens College in New York and former Haitian politician.

He spoke during an online webinar on Tuesday evening.

Like others, he said he believed that Jean-Charles Moïse, a powerful politician who was a former senator and presidential candidate, was behind Bélizaire’s nomination.

“Interestingly, Moïse, of all the politicians there, is the one calling the shots,” Pierre-Louis said.

Moïse, however, does not sit on the council. His party, Pitit Desalin, is represented by Emmanuel Vertilaire, who is among the four council members who support Bélizaire.

Advertisement

The others are Louis Gérald Gilles, Smith Augustin and Edgard Leblanc Fils, the council’s new president.

They could not be immediately reached for comment.

A document shared with The Associated Press and signed by the four council members who chose the new prime minister state they have agreed to make decisions by consensus. The document is titled, “Constitution of an Indissoluble Majority Bloc within the Presidential Council.”

The move prompted the Fanmi Lavalas party to issue a statement Wednesday calling it a “masquerade” and “conspiracy” to guarantee that PHTK “thugs and their allies retain power…and continue the tradition of corruption.”

“The Lavalas Family strongly rejects the betrayal scandal that occurred on April 30,” the party said.

Advertisement

Fils represents the January 30 political group, which is made up of parties including PHTK, whose members include former President Michel Martelly and slain President Jovenel Moïse. Meanwhile, Augustin represents the EDE/RED political party, founded by former Prime Minister Claude Joseph, and Gilles represents the Dec. 21 agreement, which is associated with former Prime Minister Ariel Henry, who recently resigned.

Henry was on an official visit to Kenya to push for the U.N.-backed deployment of a police force from the East African country when gangs in Haiti launched coordinated attacks starting Feb. 29.

They have burned police stations, opened fire on the main international airport that remains closed since early March and stormed Haiti’s two biggest prisons, releasing more than 4,000 inmates. The violence continues unabated in certain part of Port-au-Prince, including the area around the National Palace.

Haitians are demanding that security be a top priority for the council, which is tasked with selecting a new prime minister and Cabinet, as well as prepare for eventual general elections.

But some Haitians are wary of the council and the decisions it’s taking.

Advertisement

Jean Selcé, a 57-year-old electrician, noted that most of the council members are longtime politicians: “Their past is not really positive.”

“I hope their mentality can change, but I don’t believe it will,” he said. “They don’t really love the country. Who’s dying right now? It’s Haitians like me.”

Robert Fatton, a Haitian politics expert at the University of Virginia, noted that some of the parties represented on the council are responsible for the current chaos in Haiti.

“It’s a contradiction,” he said. “Every time we seem to be in a crisis, we reappoint the same people and hope that they change their ways, but they do not.”

Raising the same criticism is Michael Deibert, author of “Notes From the Last Testament: The Struggle for Haiti,” and “Haiti Will Not Perish: A Recent History.”

Advertisement

He noted in a recent essay that the council is “dominated by the same political currents who have spent the last 25 years driving Haiti over a cliff, taking advantage of impoverished young men in the slums to be used as political bludgeons before – bloated on the proceeds from kidnapping, extortion, drug trafficking and other criminal enterprises – these groups outgrew the necessity of their patrons.”

More than 2,500 people have been killed or injured across Haiti from January to March, according to the U.N.

In addition, more than 90,000 people have fled Port-au-Prince in just one month given the relentless gang violence.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Arizona Senate repeals near-total 1864 abortion ban in divisive vote

Published

on

Arizona Senate repeals near-total 1864 abortion ban in divisive vote

The repeal of abortion ban was passed 16 to 14 and is expected to be signed into law by Governor Katie Hobbs.

The Arizona Senate has voted to repeal the state’s 1864 ban on abortion, which would otherwise have taken effect within weeks.

The repeal was passed by the Senate in a 16-14 vote on Wednesday and is expected to be signed swiftly by Governor Katie Hobbs, a Democrat. Two Republican senators crossed party lines to vote in favour of repealing the ban.

The Arizona House last week passed the measure after a handful of Republicans broke party ranks and voted with Democrats to send it to the Senate.

“We’re here to repeal a bad law,” Senator Eva Burch, a Democrat, said from the floor. “I don’t want us honouring laws about women, written during a time when women were forbidden from voting.”

Advertisement

Republican Senator Wendy Rogers said in casting her vote to maintain the 1864 ban that repealing the law went against the conservative values of Arizona.

“Life starts at conception. They got it right in 1864. We need to continue to get it right in 2024,” Rogers said.

The fight over the Civil War-era abortion ban in Arizona, a state sharply split between Democrats and Republicans, is the latest flashpoint on women’s reproductive rights in the United States. In 2022, the country’s Supreme Court ended the constitutional right to abortion, leaving it up to states to decide the issue. Conservative-led states quickly invoked strict bans on the procedure within their borders.

Democrats across the US, confident that public opinion is on their side in supporting abortion rights, have sought to elevate the issue ahead of November’s presidential election. Arizona is a key battleground state.

Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee that works to elect Democrats to state legislatures, said her party would capitalise on the “extreme nature of MAGA Arizona Republicans” who voted to maintain the 1864 law as Democrats try to flip the state’s House and Senate in November’s elections.

Advertisement

Rogers, the Republican state senator, acknowledged the political risks.

“Some colleagues would say it’s politically pragmatic for us to find middle ground,” she said. “We might lose the legislature, we might lose the presidential election. But it’s more important to do what’s right.”

Near-total ban on abortions

The 1864 law was revived by a state Supreme Court ruling on April 9, and unless the legislature intervened, it would have taken effect within 60 days of that ruling, according to state Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat.

If the repeal bill is signed, a 2022 statute banning the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy would become Arizona’s prevailing abortion law. Still, there would probably be a period when nearly all abortions would be outlawed because the repeal would not take effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session, which is expected to be in June or July.

Planned Parenthood Arizona, a sexual health organisation in the state, announced it filed a motion on Wednesday afternoon asking the state Supreme Court to prevent a pause in abortion services until the repeal takes effect.

Advertisement

The near-total ban on abortions predates Arizona becoming a state.

Under the 1864 law, “every person” who participates in conducting an abortion can be held criminally liable and face a minimum sentence of two years in prison.

There are no exceptions for cases of rape or incest, although there is an exception when the pregnancy puts a woman’s life at risk.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending