#60 A Committee to Build India's ChatGPT
A New AI Committee to Keep India in the Game, The Battle against Dark Patterns: Finding Equilibrium in Regulation, Submarine Cables as Critical Assets (Part II)
Today, we will talk about the newly released IndiaAI Report and the High-Powered Committee to go along with it.
Also This Week:
Battling Dark Patterns
The Quad’s Support for Submarine Cable Networks
Cyberpolitik 1: A New AI Committee to Keep India in the Game
— Anushka Saxena
In the past week, India has expressed keen interest in building an Artificial Intelligence policy that turns India into a major player in the global AI market. To begin with, on October 14, the first edition of the 'IndiaAI' report was launched by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY). MeitY had set up seven expert groups to brainstorm on the vision, objectives, outcomes, and design for India's AI policy, and the IndiaAI report is a product of their collective strategisation. Soon after the release of the report, on October 18, the Union government's Principal Scientific Advisor Ajay Sood announced at the TechSurge Summit in New Delhi that "A high powered committee is being set up to explore such LLM and especially how this can be applied to Indian languages." These developments are stepping stones for India's quest to position itself as a key player in global supply chains of critical, deep technologies like AI, an ambition the government highlighted in the draft National Deep Tech Startup Policy unveiled for public comments just a few months ago, in late July.
Key highlights of the IndiaAI report
The IndiaAI report released on the 14th is an elaborate, 170+ page document that lists the pillars of India's AI strategy – adopting a "mission-centric approach that ensures a precise and cohesive strategy to bridge the gaps in the existing AI ecosystem viz-a-viz Compute infrastructure, Data, AI financing, Research and Innovation, targeted Skilling, and institutional capacity for Data to maximize the potential of AI to advance India's progress."
Through the report, the working groups engaged in the brainstorming and decision-making process have attempted to create a guide for developing an 'India Dataset Platform' (IDP) that will act as a single repository for collating varied data sets for training AI algorithms. The guidelines laid out with regard to the management of this Platform reveal the Indian government's top-down approach to handling AI governance, as they account for detailed standards on developing privacy, ensuring the autonomy of nodal ministries over data collected, and maintaining access control.
Similarly, the report highlights other goals of India's AI policy, such as developing an 'IndiaAI Future design', which requires the next 100 AI-based unicorn companies to be developed in India. The 'IndiaAI FutureSkills' programme requires developing an Indian workforce equipped with AI skills through the creation of a model curriculum and undertaking endeavours towards career path mapping towards learning data science, neural networks, computer vision engineering, etc., in educational institutions.
This is accompanied by recommendations to create intense public and private sector investment in AI R&D, infrastructure development (for computing and data collection), and institutional capacity building (especially in the form of AI' Centers of Excellence').
… And a High-Powered Committee to go with it
With Dr. Sood's announcement vis-a-vis the creation of a 'High powered committee' to deliberate on the creation of an Indian version of a large language model (similar to India's ChatGPT), some aspects of the report concerning the indigenous development of AI applications and capacity building are being put into play. Not a lot has been said about this Committee yet, but it seems competent Indian governmental authorities are giving AI development serious thought.
As AI is becoming a cornerstone in the geopolitical contestation between the US and China-led technological ecosystems, India is carving a space for itself. With the abovementioned developments, India aims to build "AI for All', but drafting legislation on this crucial, evolving technology is a tightrope the government must walk carefully.
Guest Post: The Battle against Dark Patterns: Finding Equilibrium in Regulation
— Ishan Tiwari
In an era dominated by e-commerce and digital convenience, the allure of exclusive deals and seamless online shopping experiences is undeniable. However, lurking beneath the surface lies a more sinister force - the subtle manipulation of consumer choices through tactics akin to those employed by the Sith Lords of Star Wars lore. These tactics, collectively known as 'Dark Patterns', have recently come under scrutiny as the Government of India's Department of Consumer Affairs, in collaboration with the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCII), unveiled draft guidelines to regulate and prevent such practices.
While 'Dark Patterns' might sound very sinister, the reality is somewhat different and more complex. The term itself was coined by UX designer Harry Brignull in 2010 to highlight a range of deceptive practices within UI/UX interfaces in digital marketing. He defined Dark Patterns as "a user interface that has been carefully crafted to trick users into doing things that are not in their interest and usually at their expense". Dark patterns trick users, causing them to waste time or money unintentionally. They can be subtle or outright deceptive.
The draft guideline is a short 8-pager online PDF document published by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs. The actual guidelines are also only 8 points long. The rest of the document is an annexure that lists what types of activities (10) can be considered dark patterns. The draft guidelines note false urgency, basket sneaking, confirm shaming, forced action, subscription trap, interface interference, bait and switch, and drip pricing as some of the recognized dark patterns. These guidelines are to be read in conjunction with the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 and the Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements for Misleading Advertisements in 2022.
With the last date for suggestions having passed on October 5th, 2023, the government's aim to combat these 'dark patterns' raises essential questions about their feasibility and enforcement. While the guidelines are somewhat paternalistic in their description of dark patterns, they notably remain silent on enforcement methods. For instance, in cases of 'False Urgency', verifying such practices may resemble a detective mission. Would online platforms be obligated to disclose extensive transaction data in the event of a dispute, potentially leading to regulatory overreach?
Similarly, in the case of confirm shaming, the prescribed format appears overly broad. Consumers are savvy, and given that the internet has been part of Indian life for nearly 25 years, people are adept at discerning what serves their interests and what does not. The guidelines' illustration for this dark pattern includes examples like a flight booking platform using the phrase "I will stay unsecured" when users opt not to include insurance in their cart. Surely, there must be more effective ways to harness the regulatory capacity of our institutions than to play knights in shining armour against such misdemeanours.
Above all, it's vital to recognize the Annexure's limited scope. It enumerates just ten dark pattern types and deliberately confines the Guidelines to them. This isn't an oversight. Acknowledging that this list can't encompass all potential scenarios is essential. Deceptive practices, though not intrinsic to human behaviour, are a pervasive aspect of our economic interactions. No matter how many dark practices the government addresses, there will always be fresh and innovative ones cropping up.
So, while the government's motives are commendable, let's adopt a practical perspective. For some of the less harmful tactics, self-regulation by platforms could be a solution. Platforms and entities can set standards for themselves, much like the ASCI, to avoid onerous regulation. However, it might be wise to incorporate more serious offences like Forced Action and Subscription Traps into the Consumer Protection Act, backed by the force of legal enforcement.
If more serious 'Dark Patterns' emerge, consumers, civil society, or market players could step in and report them to the Ministry using a streamlined feedback process. This way, the industry could effectively self-regulate, benefiting from the Ministry's watchful eye and consumer insights. This way, we'd have a more robust framework in place.
As we anticipate the Ministry's next moves, it's crucial to stay vigilant while having faith in the players in this digital arena; finding the right equilibrium between regulation and industry self-regulation is key. This will lead to a more honest and reliable online market, ensuring healthy growth for our digital economy.
** Ishan Tiwari is a student of the Takshashila Institution’s Graduate Certificate (Technology and Policy) programme. He holds a Post Graduate degree in Regulatory Policy & Governance from TISS, Mumbai.**
Cyberpolitik 2: Submarine Cables as Critical Assets (Part II)
— Bharat Sharma
**You can check out the first post in this series here**
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) comprises four nations — the United States (US), Australia, Japan, and India — and assumes a public-goods focus on working on Indo-Pacific challenges across areas like cybersecurity, supply chain resilience, and maritime security, among others. In recent years, the Quad has concentrated on supporting secure access to technology, including through resilient infrastructure. At the 2023 Quad Summit in Hiroshima, Quad leaders announced their partnership for cable connectivity and resilience to support “quality undersea cable networks” and “draw on Quad countries’ world-class expertise in manufacturing, delivering and maintaining cable infrastructure”.
This need for support to undersea infrastructure has partly arisen from geopolitical tensions. For instance, the maintenance and effectiveness of Asian subsea cables have become more complicated because of territorial concerns in the South China Sea. For instance, Chinese authorities have a lengthy approval process for cables laid down within what it considers Chinese territory in the South China Sea (along the “nine-dash line”). That has pushed companies to diversify laying cables that avoid passage through the South China Sea.
Undersea cable deployment has also assumed a focus in the US-China rivalry. As part of ‘China’s Digital Silk Road Initiative’, China began investing in communication, surveillance, and e-commerce capabilities worldwide. Subsea cables were critical to this initiative. The US sees Chinese subsea cables — or those established by Chinese companies — as posing security concerns. Therefore — as analysis from the Financial Times shows — the US has attempted to keep China out of the “internet’s plumbing” by blocking it from international subsea cable projects that involve US investment. That has led Chinese cable companies to build cable systems for China and its allied nations.
Elisabeth Braw writes that sharper tension in the future may imply that newer cables will follow geopolitical faultlines — it will lead to the rerouting of subsea cables: countries will be connected with friendly countries by cables travelling through friendly countries. For instance, it could be that territorially contested or sensitive areas worldwide will not see a lot of commercial cable investment.
Security concerns in the telecommunication (telecom) sector have also spurred newer ways of telecom network deployment. National security concerns over telecom infrastructure provided by Chinese companies, most prominently ZTE and Huawei, have led countries to advocate for “Open RAN” (Open Radio Access Networks), or telecom networks that involve RAN standards that incorporate openness, interoperability and intelligence. As Bharath Reddy explains, Open RAN may be based on open-source software for RAN components as well as clear standards for hardware, therefore mitigating potential security risks. The Quad has also adopted an initiative to support Open RAN deployment. At this year’s Quad Summit, the Quad announced the setting up an Open RAN deployment in Palau, the first in the Pacific, with a stronger focus in the larger Indo-Pacific region expected in the future.
What We're Reading (or Listening to)
[Opinion] Chipmaking subsidies are not the answer to supply security worries, by Jan-Peter Kleinhans and Pranay Kotasthane
[Podcast] Supreme Court's Decision on Marriage Equality: What's Next? ft. Shrikrishna Upadhyaya and Saurabh Todi
[Opinion] UPI: The world needs India’s Digital Public Infrastructure, but can’t see the benefit, by Josiah W Neal
[Journal Article] The Quest for Supremacy and Sagacity in AI, by Anushka Saxena