The ChatGPT artificial intelligence (AI) tool unveiled by OpenAI in November last year has kicked up a flurry of interest around the world, and Taiwan is no exception.
Such tools are likely to change many aspects of people’s lives, from the workplace and healthcare to home living. The question is, do they bring more good than bad to people, or vice versa?
AI refers to the ability of a computer to mimic the capabilities of the human mind, including learning and perceiving, as well as solving problems and comprehending natural languages. It entails the potential of computers to perform the same tasks as humans, or even outperform human intelligence, backed by technological improvements and enhancements in data analytics.
Even as early as a few years ago, there were no signs when the “AI era” would start in earnest, but today ChatGPT makes AI truly tangible for everyone for the first time. While the likes of ChatGPT are not yet perfect, what matters is the progress and direction of human-like machine intelligence development. Indeed, OpenAI’s speech and text-based chatbot is attracting huge interest from various industries, with firms rushing to integrate the technology into their products, including those in the financial industry.
AI technology can help the financial industry in many areas, including customer service, marketing, automation, investment advice, fraud detection and risk management.
However, it could also help criminals pose greater threats to financial institutions, including through data leaks and privacy breaches, the Financial Supervisory Commission said last week. The regulator asked local banks and financial service providers to closely monitor their use of AI tools to ensure data security. It told lawmakers on the legislature’s Finance Committee that it plans to issue guidelines for the responsible use of AI by local financial institutions in August at the earliest.
After Singapore last year set up “fairness, ethics, accountability and transparency” principles for the use of AI in its financial industry, the commission said it would also establish principles for local financial institutions to follow. That is, if financial institutions want to adopt AI tools in their business operations, they must have the capacity to control the technology and determine the level of tolerable risk. They would also be held accountable for any mishaps.
The Securities and Futures Bureau has proposed tighter supervision of AI-powered investment consulting services offered by local securities companies, after excitement over so-called robo-advisers fueled a surge in business over the past year: The number of clients grew 17 percent annually to 167,000 in the first quarter of this year, while assets managed by robo-advisory programs rose 42 percent year-on-year to NT$6.9 billion (US$225.33 million).
The commission seems to have no intention of drafting special legislation to regulate the use of AI in the financial sector for the time being. Instead, it is focusing on establishing a self-regulating mechanism for service providers that enables financial institutions to monitor their own legal, ethical and security standards.
Even though the commission has adopted a hands-off approach on this issue, it should still guide financial institutions in establishing robust protection mechanisms against possible harm from the use of AI. In the meantime, it must consider whether it would eventually take the reins to keep up with international trends and the financial industry’s demands.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
RSS