Last week, we were all informed about the end of a 30-year era of romantic and effervescent digital society. Unfortunately, the implications go beyond the digital world.

Globally, ChatGPT has announced the death of social media, especially the Facebook platform. The psychological resources that social media relies on for its success do not work in the presence of, even potential, artificial intelligence, no one will find satisfaction in an argument or dialogue with a robot.

Guarantees that the interlocutor is human will be needed, and thus online anonymity will disappear. By then, platforms will be overloaded with AI-generated content, and some of it will affect their ad revenue.

The effect will spread to old habits. Approaches taken today, such as delegating to a co-author the management of a public figure’s online presence or asking a professional to create a work of art or documentary with an emphasis on accuracy but not originality, will have to face the challenge of own creation in the face of AI’s ability to perform the same task. This will increase the risk of being accused of plagiarism, or at least public embarrassment.

We are very far, including instinctively, from the time when we legally recognize the invention, innovation and copyright of an AI system

Many activities will be identified as unnecessary. The first example is education – the practice of commentaries and works – the difference between knowledge and understanding will be extremely difficult to measure.

Many professions will disappear, the best news is the disappearance of troll farms. The bad news is the infinite scaling of hybrid warfare. We can already see the realization of this potential in the fact that in Romania the AI ​​strategy is coordinated by the president, whose internal constitutional powers are focused on security.

Also internally, and now we move to the government’s draft Cyber ​​Security Act, pragmatic measures to adapt to new realities are announced to us without any apparent regret.

Article 3 c.) brings open source programmers under the law. They are required to adhere to the list of principles in Article 5, including taking full responsibility for both the state of their IT systems and any precautions that may have been taken. Depending on where the open source product to which he has contributed is ultimately used, this volunteer may expect, in accordance with Article 19, to be audited by one of the statutory bodies, by his group of auditors in accordance with the internal methodology.

Although we do not have a strong community of contributors in Romania, it is sad that this stream, which originates from the most beautiful human traits, is being pushed towards extinction.

Another disappearing paradigm is the split between countries and countries. A common perception, perhaps fueled by American cultural products, is that one’s own citizens are treated better than “others.” Underlying this perception is an institutional divide, we all know the FBI are better guys than the CIA.

But the Cybersecurity Act regulates both offensive and defensive activities and classifies them primarily as MAPNs and SRIs rather than SIEs. The collection of information is facilitated by Article 25 (2), which prohibits requesting but not receiving personal data from security service providers. The activity of cyber intelligence is superseded by Art. 30 (3) into a space not clearly regulated by international treaties, even if the subjects may also be Romanian citizens residing in Romania. This is the answer to the real problem, the identification of the hacker is late, his activities are monitored in time and the pragmatic desire is that this monitoring is effective and not limited to the best scenario for him. In retrospect, however, as in the USA[i]we can find that some rights of the country’s citizens have been violated and start a discussion about effective efforts to identify and respect those rights.

Globalization, another feature of this period, is under attack from new requirements for supply chain security. We will not buy based on quality and price, the law requires companies to check all activities of the supplier in terms of specific risks and to choose it also according to how reliably it responds to these requests.

So we have something to think about.

There is real pressure to do something. The denouement, however, is an attribute of dignitaries, and I, above all, would like to feel sympathy from them. I appreciate the recent effort by MCID to write consistent reference notes and thus explain its position to the public. But I would like everyone to show us that they understand and regret the price we will pay.

One would like to think that MCID’s priority is not to find a place under the sun.

I wish someone would ask me if I want to give up social media, the basis of hybrid warfare.

I would like to see the connection between the extraordinary increase in responsibility placed on an unknown but large number of individuals and organizations and the assessment of their professional capacity. If we’ve gotten to the point where I can kill people with a computer as well as I can with a car, maybe it’s time to introduce a computerized driver’s license and clear practical rules to follow. Of course, but I would not want to be reminded of the consequences of obligations such as “the driver must reduce speed to avoid any danger”. Read the whole article and comment on Contributors.ro