比较欧中美三地AI监管差异，揭示安全与创新的权衡逻辑
Comparative Global AI Regulation: Policy Perspectives from the EU, China, and the US
- 对比欧盟、中国、美国及加州的AI治理框架，分析其制度差异
- 各国在安全与创新、合作与竞争间做出不同风险收益权衡
- 适合关注AI政策、国际科技竞争与监管演进的研究者阅读
作为一项强大且快速发展的双用途技术，人工智能既带来巨大利益，也引发严重风险。为此，全球各地的管理机构正制定多种AI法规与政策。本文比较了欧盟、中国和美国三种不同的应对路径。在美国，研究涵盖联邦与州级监管，重点分析加州待决参议院法案1047（SB-1047）。各监管体系反映了不同的文化、政治与经济背景，也体现出对监管风险与收益权衡的不同看法，尤其在安全与创新、合作与竞争之间的平衡判断上存在分歧。此外，不同框架还反映出对集中化权威的信任程度与对分散式自由市场自我调节机制信任程度的差异。这些各异的AI创新与治理路径相互影响，塑造着国际社会及未来全球AI监管格局。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
As a powerful and rapidly advancing dual-use technology, AI offers both immense benefits and worrisome risks. In response, governing bodies around the world are developing a range of regulatory AI laws and policies. This paper compares three distinct approaches taken by the EU, China and the US. Within the US, we explore AI regulation at both the federal and state level, with a focus on California's pending Senate Bill 1047. Each regulatory system reflects distinct cultural, political and economic perspectives. Each also highlights differing regional perspectives on regulatory risk-benefit tradeoffs, with divergent judgments on the balance between safety versus innovation and cooperation versus competition. Finally, differences between regulatory frameworks reflect contrastive stances in regards to trust in centralized authority versus trust in a more decentralized free market of self-interested stakeholders. Taken together, these varied approaches to AI innovation and regulation influence each other, the broader international community, and the future of AI regulation.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。