
Professor Shalom Lappin advocates for urgent international AI regulation, IP reform, and workforce preparedness to ensure AI development serves the public good, not just corporate interests.
As artificial intelligence rapidly reshapes the world, international regulation of tech giants, reforms to intellectual property laws, and planning for major shifts in the job market should be at the top of the agenda for global policymakers.
That’s the message from AI expert Professor Shalom Lappin, who presents a powerful case backed by research in his new book Understanding the Artificial Intelligence Revolution.
“The public domain and its citizens need to play a major role in determining the framework within which AI technology continues to develop,” argues Lappin, who holds positions at Queen Mary University of London, King’s College London, and the University of Gothenburg.
Rather than focusing on far-off sci-fi fears about superintelligent machines, Lappin zeroes in on the real, immediate challenges that AI presents today. These include corporate power over AI development, the spread of online misinformation, and the urgent need for smart, proactive policy decisions.
Lappin identifies tech monopolization as a critical concern. Large companies now dominate AI development, with tech companies creating 32 major machine learning models in 2022 while universities produced only three. This concentration of power, he argues, allows corporations to shape research priorities according to commercial interests rather than public benefit.
Environmental damage presents another urgent challenge. Training ChatGPT-4 reportedly consumed approximately 50 gigawatt hours of electricity—equivalent to the annual usage of thousands of American households. The manufacturing of microchips for AI systems involves toxic chemicals, vast amounts of water, and enormous quantities of electricity, with chip factories consuming up to 100 megawatts per hour.
Key Policy Recommendations
To address these challenges, Professor Lappin outlines several key policy priorities. First, comprehensive international regulation of tech companies is essential, as individual countries lack sufficient resources and enforcement powers to address these global issues. International trade agreements could provide mechanisms for imposing effective regulations.
Second, intellectual property rights must be reformed to ensure rights holders are compensated when their work is used to train AI systems.
“At a minimum, these companies should be required to receive the consent of the copyright holders for the protected data that they use. In the interests of transparency, they should also be obliged to list the materials on which their systems are trained,” notes Lappin.
Tackling AI Bias, Disinformation, and Deepfakes
Lappin also addresses widespread bias in AI decision-making systems across healthcare, hiring, and financial services. He suggests that effective measures must be policy-led and implemented to combat disinformation and hate speech online, balancing free expression with protection from harmful content, as current self-regulation by tech companies has proven ineffective.
He argues that disinformation and deep fakes represent a tangible threat; as generative AI becomes increasingly sophisticated, distinguishing fact from fiction grows more difficult.
“We could soon find ourselves living in an environment where separating fact from malicious fiction becomes increasingly difficult. At that point, the shared beliefs needed to sustain cohesion within the public domain begin to give way to doubt, recrimination, and chaos,” Lappin warns.
Finally, governments must prepare for potential widespread job displacement as AI automation extends across various sectors. Significant public investment in services and alternative forms of employment will be necessary to prevent major social disruption.
“These are not matters that we can afford to leave solely to the vicissitudes of the market, and to the tech companies that play such a dominant role in shaping that market,” Lappin concludes.
Reference: “Understanding the Artificial Intelligence Revolution” by Shalom Lappin, 15 June 2025.
DOI: 10.1201/9781003624790
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
6 Comments
AI Without Rules Is a Global Risk, Warns Leading Expert.
WHY?
Is Science Without Rules a Global Risk?
Space can dynamically evolve that are rejected by today’s physics and all so-called peer-reviewed publications (including Physical Review Letters, Science, Nature, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, etc) . Ask to these so-called peer-reviewed publications: Where should things in space come from? Do things in space originate from the dynamic evolution of space itself, or from God, Devil, or Angels? These so-called peer-reviewed publications collude to propagate and doggedly adhere to the notion that two sets of cobalt-60 rotating in opposite directions—whether symmetrical or not—constitute mirror images of each other. What Is The Science Rules?
If researchers are interested, please browse https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1917878197971816654.
And who should write the rules and control the tech? The UN, the WEF, the IC’s and Global Deep Staters? No thanks…been there, done that…didn’t work out too well.
Agree. Whoever is in power at the time will determine what is information and what is disinformation. The current and former administration would have very different ideas. Free speech dictates that more information of all types is the answer. The same true information will come from many sources while the “disinformation” will have differing versions depending upon the individual authors own biases.
HELLO SCIENTIFIC FRIENDS *
Reminder ::::: For every text that is written, experts must learn different sciences in an applied way so that the text is scientific and logical .
******** good luck ******
Two sets of cobalt-60 rotating in opposite directions—whether symmetrical or not—constitute mirror images of each other. Is this scientific and logical?
Don’t worry; corporate greed shall prevail, as it always has. Just look at the arms industry ever since fletchers started making arrows.