Ethics & Compliance
Applying AI ethics guidelines and responding to AI regulation in Korea and abroad.
Current AI regulatory landscape
flowchart TD
A["AI regulatory landscape"] --> B["EU AI Act<br/>Effective 2024"]
A --> C["Korea's AI Framework Act<br/>In preparation"]
A --> D["U.S. AI Executive Order<br/>Effective 2023"]
A --> E["ISO 42001<br/>AI management system"]
style A fill:#0891B2,stroke:#0E7490,color:#fff
style B fill:#2563EB,stroke:#1D4ED8,color:#fff
style C fill:#7C3AED,stroke:#6D28D9,color:#fff
style D fill:#EA580C,stroke:#C2410C,color:#fff
style E fill:#16A34A,stroke:#15803D,color:#fff
EU AI Act risk classification
| Risk level | Examples | Requirements |
|---|---|---|
| Prohibited | Social credit scoring, real-time biometric identification | Banned outright |
| High-risk | AI for hiring, credit scoring, medical diagnosis | Strict regulation and auditing |
| Limited-risk | Chatbots, deepfakes | Transparency obligations |
| Minimal risk | Spam filters, AI in games | Self-regulation |
Applying AI ethics principles
Anthropic’s Constitutional AI approach
An approach that internalizes ethical principles during model training:
Example principles:
- Do not provide information that is harmful or dangerous to people
- Do not generate discriminatory or biased responses
- State uncertainty explicitly when it exists
- Respect individual privacyPractical checklist
Bias review:
- Audit training data for demographic bias
- Test model output fairness across different groups
- Monitor for bias on a regular (quarterly) basis
Ensuring transparency:
- Disclose to users when content is AI-generated
- Provide explanations for AI decisions (explainability)
- Disclose data usage and personal-data handling practices
Establishing accountability:
- Clearly designate AI system owners and accountable parties
- Establish an incident-reporting procedure for AI-related issues
- Operate a regular ethics review committee