Talk:Robotics and AI Technology Research Act (665)

Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:06 AM

Tabled by Jack Williams, MGA, as an independent member's bill. An Act to create a research program under the Technology and Innovative Grants Act. https://kodiak.wiki/wiki/Robotics_and_AI_Technology_Research_Act_(665) Voting is set for 20 April.

https://kodiak.wiki/wiki/Technology_and_Innovation_Grants_Act_(635) Original text here. The Kodiak Republic Wiki Robotics and AI Technology Research Act (665) An Act to create a research program under the Technology and Innovative Grants Act The Kodiak Republic Wiki Technology and Innovation Grants Act (635) An act to provide government subsidies to private business willing to invest in innovative technologies. PASSED 5 December 2021, Aye 13, Nay 2, Abstain 0 AMENDED by the Labor Reform Resolution, 645. AMENDED by the Commerce and Labour Expenditures Act, 654. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:07 AM

@Assembly Member this bill is open for debate now. R. Henry Welch, III [NUP]

pinned 

a message

to this channel. See all 

pinned messages .

— 04/06/2024 11:09 AM

Ecky B. Ryland [KWP] — 04/06/2024 11:09 AM This bill has my full support. Dr Edmund Cosmo Maltravers — 04/06/2024 11:11 AM I am somewhat skeptical about the promotion of AI technology, I shall be honest. It has shown no true benefit. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:14 AM

In this act, The Robotics and AI Technology Research Program is created and the proper funding is granted for this purpose. I believe with technology is advancing so quickly, I believe that we should start researching AI technology to better understand it and find ways to utilize it in the future. Ecky B. Ryland [KWP] — 04/06/2024 11:14 AM Some benefits: machine learning helps in scientific research, autonomous vehicles, assistance in medical diagnosis, etc. Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/06/2024 11:15 AM On article 1.2 - Authorises the KISRA Bureau of Private Innovation to review and identify projects which may, by its own standards, prove promising for the advancement of science and technology currently under development by private or non-governmental enterprise.

Does this mean that KISRA Bureau of Private Innovation will intervene any private or non government enterprise without any legalities or what? Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:17 AM

That is part of the original text. I am only adding 1.3 apologies and 1.3.1 And I am adding 125 million to help fund the new program Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/06/2024 11:23 AM Ahh ok then, my apologies. Also is there any ethical limitation on the research program? Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:24 AM

For my understanding the research shouldn't stray towards any unethical practices, but if there needs to be a guarantee of this written, I can add it. Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/06/2024 11:30 AM Based on potential risk of the usage of the ai itself and its ethical research, i would like you to include the ethical limitation safety to the researchers and also limit how the ai operate to evade any problem in the future if you don't mind about it. Thank you. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/06/2024 11:38 AM

Thank for the suggested amendment, it has been added. Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/06/2024 3:34 PM Your welcome, also thank you for listing my suggestions. Burch IV | NUP — 04/07/2024 5:44 AM Full support R. Henry Welch, III [NUP] — 04/07/2024 6:11 AM are there two bills in the original post or did we just change the name? oh I see, its the original. okay Look, personally I am suspicious of a government agency having control over regulatory ethical standards. The definitions of "harm" and "required" are lacking. Pollution from excess power use can cause harm, do we refuse an application on that basis? Testing apparatuses which are mid-iteration can cause harm if misused by users, do we refuse an application on that basis?

I would propose a body of representatives from existing technology enterprise organisations and a representative from the council of Universities who together can work to build an industry wide standard. A demand from upon high from a government entity with no accountability to the industry it purports to regulate is simply not going to be flexible or knowledgeable enough to properly do its job. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/07/2024 5:42 PM

I would suggest maybe taking out the original amendment and then writing up another piece of legislation in regard to ethics and having an official board. It would be weird to write that in this current legislation. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/07/2024 8:04 PM

I don’t completely agree with having a body of representatives that try to regulate a Research program. This program is government owned. So I feel it’s under the purview of the government to decide on the standard in my opinion. Bernard Glocke [I] — 04/09/2024 7:35 AM I do not believe it is in the government's best interest to commit funding to this endeavor for a domestic program. Looking at it objectively, Kodiak is hardly a leader in scientific development or education standards. We might be able to achieve the same effect through contracting with foreign partners to achieve the same goal. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 7:39 AM

Question I have is why contract with foreign partners and possibly spend more for research when we can create this research program domestically and trust our people to do the job. Bernard Glocke [I] — 04/09/2024 7:51 AM That rest with the assumption we will come out with a product that meets the needs and justifies the costs. Through contracting for a license to a program that is already on the market, we can achieve the needs of AI in Government functions. Likewise the private sector can continue to research its own innovation but through potential reverse engineering of established systems. R. Henry Welch, III [NUP] — 04/09/2024 7:51 AM essentially, why reinvent the wheel when we can ask the wheel manufactures to make a kodiak wheel Ecky B. Ryland [KWP] — 04/09/2024 8:22 AM "Kodiak is hardly a leader in scientific development or education standards." Well we could become a leader if we invest in science. By only contracting with foreign partners we will always stay behind. Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/09/2024 8:34 AM Yes, we can invest in science, but we need the basic knowledge and experience to be the foundation of the AI development frontier. That's why we also need to send some of the people from the government to join with those foreign partner. Therefore we can ensure a good starting point in the AI development and have the knowledge to develop it further. Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/09/2024 8:34 AM This bill has my full support, I believe that AI has many benefits in development of a better workplace through calculation and allocation of resources. As well as boosting our domestic research of information technology related sectors of economy. And as for why we should reinvent the wheel, the wheel itself has been reinvented many times over as infrastructure, technology and materials have evolved. Looking at the designs for vehicles in the future, we can expect that the concept of the wheel will be challenged if not reinvented several times more.

In this ever changing world, if we are too complacent to change, we will fall back behind the line. Furthermore, while the idea of us contracting with foreign partners can be beneficial, we should also beware that it can cause dependency

How about we start with working with our own researchers and manufacturers? Businesses will cooperate with the government to develop a plan for innovations, the state will fund and supervise them. That combines with hiring our own and even foreign researchers to make sure that we have enough manpower for this project Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 9:29 AM

I think Mr. Paramount says it best here. I will add. We talk about Nationalism and re-growing national support, especially in a time where nationalism is keeping this country together, however there are suggestions here to take it and give the job to foreigners? Why is that? We can hire qualified Kodiak citizens to do the research. R. Henry Welch, III [NUP] — 04/09/2024 9:30 AM its an oversimplification to say its "give it to the foreigners" its a question of capability. We can spend a whole bunch of money we don't need to reinventing procedures and skills, or we can hire those with the skills to get us a product we can learn from at a fraction of the cost. We cannot let ideology cloud our judgement simply because it is emotive We don't need to do new experiments to learn how electricity works, we can read it in a book a foreigner wrote. We don't need the government to reinvent a technological tool. We can get training and products from a foreign company and then reverse engineer the knowledge faster and cheaper and more efficiently Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/09/2024 9:34 AM We can but like many have said, we don’t have many. I agree that we need to change but right now, I don’t think we have enough intellectuals for this.

How about working with foreigners while simultaneously develop our education infrastructure to create more intellectuals for our country using newly developed technology so that we won’t rely on foreigners in the future?

Foreign partnership maybe temporary, but they can have impacts on our country for the better in the meantime R. Henry Welch, III [NUP] — 04/09/2024 9:36 AM we need to recognise the bill specifically creates an institution to research this technology. That's what it does. But makes no authorisation to do anythign except start from nothing. It has no cooperation mandate. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 9:39 AM

I can work with this. Even though personally I’d rather stay far away from foreign hands on a state funded program. If this is the way for our future in AI technology to be more positive then I can re-write it to have authorization to contract the research out to foreign partners. I’ll look into foreign partners today. Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/09/2024 9:54 AM Also another problem I have with this bill is its vagueness. It says that we are allocating funds to the technological development program but what’s the detail plan? Procedures? What will be necessary steps for the plan? Which sector should we focus on first, educational equipment or quicker automation in production to produce more products and sell them?

The bill feels rather aimless to me, we can’t just throw money into the project that doesn’t have a proper end goal and step-by-step planning. It’s like trying to build a house without any proper knowledge nor planning and you end up with an unstable, poor quality house A house that can hurt your family or others because of how fragile it is ((Also sorry for potential bad grammar, my brain is frying rn)) Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 10:14 AM

Now that you mention Mr. Paramount, I actually would like for the program to focus on researching Ai Technology for possible integrations into Education.

The research should identify where it would have most impact, which in my opinion should be Administrative efficiency, Student Assessment, and Personalized learning. With experts in Education, Artificial Intelligence, Psychology, and data science, The research program should have goals in to figuring out how to integrate the technology to improve Student performance and how efficient a teacher is in the classroom.

With a written out research design, I would mainly focus on trying to research and develop tutoring systems or automated grading systems so that Teachers can focus on teaching the curriculum and not spending hours on end grading hundreds of assignments. We have seen this type of automation in online gradebook sites that universities use, but I'd like to see some further develop in them for the high school and lower levels of educations. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 10:27 AM

@Alexander Paramount (NUP) Mr. Paramount, If it would make the assembly feel more understanding of what this research program is for, then I can amend the bill with this language. I do apologies, as my bills can sometimes be vague. ((Like American caption bills with no filling until an amendment is put in)). Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/09/2024 10:32 AM I would prefer the automated grading system rather than tutoring system. Why? We need teacher as an interaction between students and it's lesson. Especially in lower level where teacher interaction is very needed in term of creating children mentality and character. If the tutoring system only help the teacher at teaching then I'll be fine. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 10:33 AM

Well the good thing is this research program can help research and develop both tutoring and Automated grading Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/09/2024 10:33 AM It’s fine, I actually like the bill being more in depth like this. It shows a clearer goal, which keeps us more well-informed in voting. This bill idea is a good start, it just needs more expansion Do you plan for this bill to just be education-centered? Ecky B. Ryland [KWP] — 04/09/2024 10:37 AM AI has shown to have the potential to diagnose diseases and have other benefits in healthcare. I think focusing on education is good, but we should also use some resources for healthcare. Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/09/2024 10:38 AM Ahh.. I see then. But overall all i want is limitation on the usage of AI as assistant tools for us. Therefore it will reduce some dependacy of the usage of the AI. Using AI in itself is good for development, but dependant on it will also create laziness for our future generation. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 10:39 AM

I believe if this is going to be a government based program, I’m sure we can have different projects within the program, AI technology integration into Education, Factory Automation, Automobile technology, Healthcare, mainly in Medical diagnosis, patient monitoring, and drug discovery. Energy sector with optimizing energy production. Any and every industry and government department could potentially have Ai integrated into the system. I think the best course is to start off in Education, Healthcare, and Manufacturing with factory automation, and then as we see results, then we can expand further into other projects Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/09/2024 10:40 AM

And as that is true, the use of AI can be so beneficial for our technological future @Assembly Member ((since we have until the 20th of April to vote.)) I am going to amend the bill and expand the purpose of the program. It should be finished by the end of the day and then we can continue debate. Thank you. This is great debate and I thank @Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] and @Alexander Paramount (NUP) for the suggestions. Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/09/2024 10:49 AM Glad I could help Mr Kanzler [Brundstadt] — 04/09/2024 10:57 AM It's my honor to be able to help. ((Also this is fun and entertaining)) R. Henry Welch, III [NUP] — 04/13/2024 8:10 AM Hello? Dr Edmund Cosmo Maltravers — 04/13/2024 8:21 AM I motion to vote. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/13/2024 8:22 AM

Objection! I decline this motion. I haven’t put on the amendment to the bill. ((It’s been a busy week at work)). I will have the bill revised. Then we can move to a vote Alexander Paramount (NUP) — 04/13/2024 8:30 AM I agree, this bill is not detailed enough for me to make a decision. It has to wait longer Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/14/2024 9:40 AM

@Assembly Member I apologize for my lack of activity to get this amendment done. I’ll have it finished today and we can move towards vote Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/15/2024 11:43 AM

@Assembly Member I have applied the amendment to the bill. what are your thoughts? Geo — 04/16/2024 9:35 AM I suggest we should add a clause that counters the environmental costs of AI technology and research, as you may know, this technology requires a lot of water and electricity to run, for running its large servers 24x7. This is going to only grow as we promote this technology, which will put ecological stresses on environment relating especially to water and its distribution.

Our systems may struggle to cope with the rapid increase in demand for both power and water as adoption grows, this cost should not be entirely shouldered by the government alone and civil society, private entities should be involved in this aswell.

Perhaps the program can include promoting balancing of these costs by pushing private organisations receiving or applying for the grant to spend on ecological, water conservation and provide its proof to the bureau or investment in renewable energy production.

Alternatively we can create a separate program altogether for this purpose under environmental body of the government. Although it is my belief that adding clause to promote offsetting the costs of the technology would be most beneficial and direct way to do it. Doing so also send a good signal of government's commitment towards conservation and fairness (by preventing the externality cost from falling to commoners while some people benefit from the gains off of it).

Rest assured, the bill has my support. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/16/2024 9:43 AM

I can agree with your statement. We do need a separate program that will do just that and help offset the costs of Ai technology. However, I believe this can be addressed in another bill than added to this one. Geo — 04/16/2024 9:44 AM Fine by me. Dr Edmund Cosmo Maltravers — 04/16/2024 9:55 AM I motion to vote Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/16/2024 9:55 AM

@Assembly Member we have a motion to vote, do we have a second? Faralana (Joe Fala, DPPK) — 04/16/2024 10:34 AM Second EasyPoll APP

— 04/16/2024 10:41 AM

Question Does the General Assembly approve of the Robotics and AI Technology Research Act (665)?

Choices 🇦 Aye 🇧 Nay 🇨 Abstain

Final Result 🇦 ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░░ [12 • 71%] 🇧 ▓▓░░░░░░░░ [4 • 24%] 🇨 ▓░░░░░░░░░ [1 • 6%] 17 users voted

Settings

alarm_clock: Poll already ended (11 days ago)

spy: Anonymous Poll

one: allowed choice

lock: No other votes allowed

Allowed roles: @Assembly Member Poll ID: d594772a Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/16/2024 10:41 AM

@Assembly Member Voting has started and will conclude in 72 hours. please vote on this bill. Jack Williams (DPPK) OP

— 04/19/2024 11:10 AM

With 12 ayes, 4 nays, and 1 abstain, The Robotics and Ai Technology Research Act (665) has been passed by the assembly. This channel will be archived soon.