Comprehension

Students have been abuzz over how artificial intelligence tools can do their homework and programmers over how these can increase their productivity or take away their jobs. As much as digitization has transformed the country in recent years, there is a widespread feeling that at some point around the horizon, AI shall rejig everything in even more fundamental, fantastic, and frightening ways. This is why deciding how the coming changes should be regulated is very important. TRAI has made a strong case for an independent statutory authority to ensure the responsible development and use of AI in the country, a global agency along similar lines shall likely be pitched at the G20 leaders’ summit, and interestingly even American MNC Microsoft has floated a blueprint for AI governance in India. The great size and diversity of its “data points” make India of great interest to all developers of AI technologies.
But India is only at their receiving end, nowhere close to the US and China’s advances. Although lately, it is becoming obvious how much state censorship is encumbering China’s large language modeling, the country is still very much in the game with PhDs in fields related to AI, investments in AI chip hardware design, and domestic generative models like Wu Dao. The scientific accomplishments of India’s Chandrayaan mission have seen it being wooed for various international space collaborations. This promises spinoff technological benefits across Indian industry and is also geo-strategically useful. Likewise, it is only with sufficient AI prowess that India shall really get to play at the high table of global rulemaking for AI.
Knowing how much Indians’ future shall be shaped by generative AI needs matching efforts to create indigenous models. In this and at this stage, a proactive government role is key, rather than just waiting on some large corporation to do the needful. Missing this bus will after all be even more costly than missing the chip research one. Plus, GOI alone can push academia-industry collaborations with the necessary weight and urgency. This does not let other institutions off the hook. A US judge has rejected the copyright for an AI-generated artwork. Indian courts should start engaging with the broader issue of non-human agency rather than wait for precedence to be set elsewhere. Indian schools need to think beyond the ban-ChatGPT mindset. Let us lead instead of only being led.
[Extracted from “First, get the tech: Unless India develops domestic AI heft, it wouldn’t play any meaningful part in global regulatory efforts”, Times of India]

Question: 1

Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • The best way to deal with the advancement of AI is to leave its regulation to market forces.
  • Government-driven control of AI is inefficient and shall promote red-tapism
  • Private companies with their large capital and infrastructure design the most efficient AI governance models.
  • Government-led initiatives of AI regulation and development lead to efficient outcomes.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The passage argues for the need of a proactive government role in developing AI and regulating its use, stressing that without government intervention, India risks falling behind in AI advancements and global decision-making
The Correct Answer is option (D): Government-led initiatives of AI regulation and development lead to efficient outcomes.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the main argument of the passage?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • Governments that lead the initiative on regulating and responding to the advancement of AI tools benefit the most from them.
  • Governments that don’t engage with generative AI and remain at its receiving end stay risk-averse with nothing to lose.
  • Governments that actively incentivise MNCs to participate in AI governance make the most out of the advancements in the field.
  • Governments that explore models of public-private partnership strike the right balance in regulating generative AI.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

This strengthens the main argument by asserting that governments that actively regulate and engage with AI reap the benefits, which aligns with the author’s call for India to take a leading role in AI development and regulation.
The Correct Answer is option (A): Governments that lead the initiative on regulating and responding to the advancement of AI tools benefit the most from them.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

Based only on the author’s statement that “Indian courts should start engaging with the broader issue of non-human agency rather than wait for precedence to be set elsewhere”, which of the following would the author be most likely to agree with?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • Courts should take the initiative by being innovative and laying down rules where no precedents exist.
  • Courts should wait for precedents and in the meantime refrain from engaging with the challenges presented by generative AI.
  • Courts should stop relying on precedents and decide cases on the basis of judicial wisdom.
  • Precedents are the best possible safeguard against arbitrary decision-making.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The author advocates for Indian courts to address the challenges of generative AI proactively rather than waiting for global precedents, emphasizing the need for innovation in legal responses to new technologies.
The Correct Answer is option (A): Courts should take the initiative by being innovative and laying down rules where no precedents exist.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

If the information in the passage above is correct, which of the following must necessarily be true?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • AI regulation is the responsibility of the legislature alone
  • AI regulation is the responsibility of courts and can’t be addressed through standalone statutory rules.
  • AI regulation is a collaborative effort involving all the institutions of the State.
  • AI regulation is the domain of private industry.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The passage suggests that AI regulation requires a collaborative approach, involving not just the government but also academia, industry, and the judiciary.
The Correct Answer is option (C): AI regulation is a collaborative effort involving all the institutions of the State.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5

Based on the author’s arguments, which of the following would result in weakening, rather than strengthening India’s position at the forefront of generative AI?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • Investing in indigenous AI chip hardware design and domestic generative models.
  • Exploring spinoff technological benefits with other scientific advancements like the Chandrayaan mission.
  • Introducing generative models like Wu Dao which have demonstrated success in other jurisdictions.
  • Locally developing technologies such as indigenous AI models.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Introducing foreign models like Wu Dao does not contribute to building India’s own capabilities in generative AI. The author stresses the importance of indigenous development in AI to lead global regulatory efforts.
The Correct Answer is option (C): Introducing generative models like Wu Dao which have demonstrated success in other jurisdictions.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6

The author states that, “Missing this bus will after all be even more costly than missing the chip research one.” For this statement to be true, with which of the following statements about chip research must the author most likely agree?

Updated On: Nov 7, 2024
  • India lead chip research from its frontiers.
  • India was right to leave regulation of chip industry and research to MNCs.
  • India should have proactively played a role in responding to new research in chip technology.
  • The failure to respond to new developments in chip technology was a bigger loss than the potential failure to regulate generative AI.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The author uses the analogy of missing the chip research opportunity to emphasize that failing to take proactive steps in AI development would have significant negative consequences, similar to the missed opportunity in chip research.
The Correct Answer is option (C): India should have proactively played a role in responding to new research in chip technology.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Verbal Reasoning

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

View More Questions