The public consultation revealed four main clusters of opinions on AI. The first cluster emphasized the need for comprehensive data governance and AI regulation, with AI being considered a public resource. The second cluster expressed mixed feelings about the rapid development of AI, acknowledging its potential but also raising concerns about over-reliance and social impacts. The third cluster viewed AI as a tool and collaborator, acknowledging its limitations but also recognizing its benefits. The fourth cluster saw AI as a positive influence in the creative process, but also acknowledged potential downsides such as the devaluation of creation.
Future Implications and Adaptation to AI
(61 arguments,40% of total)
Cluster analysis:
The participants expressed a mix of optimism and concern about the rapid development of AI. They acknowledged its potential to transform industries and enhance human abilities, but also raised concerns about over-reliance, potential social impacts, and the blurring of truth. The role of education in preparing for an AI-driven future was emphasized, with suggestions for hands-on, life-related experiences and systematic instruction on AI use. The need for humans to adapt and evolve with AI was a recurring theme, as was the idea that AI is a tool to enhance, not replace, human capabilities. However, concerns were raised about potential negative side effects and the challenge of discerning truth in an AI-dominated world.
Representative comments:
"The fear of new technology is overly magnified"
"Humans do not need to understand how it works to be able to use and benefit from it."
"How to use AI more intelligently will become an important indicator for future creation."
"As AI technology continues to develop at an unprecedented speed, the boundary between human and machine-generated creations becomes blurred"
"The current state of AI development will dramatically change many industry ecosystems."
Legal and Ethical Considerations of AI Use
(31 arguments,21% of total)
Cluster analysis:
The participants expressed a strong need for comprehensive data governance and AI regulation. They advocated for the public sector to establish data infrastructure and resolve legal foundations. They also highlighted the importance of addressing intellectual property issues, profit sharing, and cultural sensitivity in AI-generated content. The group emphasized the need for fairness and justice in AI design and deployment, and suggested that AI should be considered a public resource accessible to all. They also discussed the potential of AI in enhancing public services and its role in the transportation system. The participants called for strict regulations on AI usage, including the management of online resources and the adoption of a real-name system for netizens. They also suggested that AI-generated content should appropriately cite sources and be considered for copyright or derivative work on a case-by-case basis.
Representative comments:
"The public sector should establish infrastructure related to data, such as prioritizing the resolution of the legal foundation and related norms of data governance."
"This would enable scholars or the industry to more actively try to use government-related data."
"How to share profits between AI-generated works and the data source providers is an urgent issue."
"Key issues about intellectual property, ownership, and legal responsibility need to be deeply explored."
"Regulations about AI should take into account the different cultures and contexts around the world, not just the perspectives of specific countries."
AI as a Tool and Collaborator
(31 arguments,21% of total)
Cluster analysis:
The participants' views on AI are diverse, but they generally agree that AI is a tool and a collaborator, not a replacement for human interaction or life skills. They acknowledge AI's limitations, such as its inability to provide human warmth, its reliance on large amounts of data for accuracy, and its inability to create or know beyond human knowledge. Despite these limitations, they recognize AI's benefits, such as making life more convenient, providing learning assistance, and offering a new perspective. Some participants suggest that AI works should have a separate award category, while others express concerns about fairness.
Representative comments:
"AI is just a tool in a series of technological advancements in history"
"AI cannot provide the warmth of human interaction"
"AI compresses and destroys original data, making it harder to obtain real data during the learning process."
"AI provides more learning choices and assistance"
"I think AI works should have a separate award category."
AI in Creative Process and Artistry
(28 arguments,19% of total)
Cluster analysis:
The participants expressed a generally positive view of AI's role in the creative process, highlighting its potential to enhance human creativity, expand design concepts, and democratize the creation process. They suggested that AI could be a valuable tool in fields like environmental sustainability and ecological conservation. However, they also acknowledged potential downsides, such as the devaluation of creation and the need for traditional skills to refine AI-generated works. They proposed that AI-generated works should be considered joint creations, involving the AI developer, data owner, and user. They also emphasized the importance of detailing the creative process, including the use of AI and post-processing tools like Photoshop.
Representative comments:
"Human-created works are more meaningful than those created by AI."
"AI is suitable for use in the 'divergent process', serving as an aid in the development of ideas, helping designers to quickly generate creativity and expand the breadth of design concepts."
"Using AI learning can produce more random results"
"When submitting, they need to specify their creative concept"
"They need to mention the creative tools used"
Appendix
This report was generated using an AI pipeline that consists of the following steps:
Step 1: extraction - show code, show prompt(gpt-4)