2025年3月22日 周六
Criminal risk and governance path of ChatGPT-like system
Author:
Clc Number:

D924.7

  • Article
  • | |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference [26]
  • |
  • Related [20]
  • | | |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    ChatGPT-like system refers to the content-generating artificial intelligence (AIGC) represented by ChatGPT, which combines generative pre-training with algorithmic language conversion. ChatGPT-like system not only promotes the development of human society, but also brings criminal risks. When ChatGPT-like systems obtain corresponding information to generate certain content, it is easy to break away from human control and intervention and improperly infringe on the confidentiality of other data. At the same time, if the content generated by ChatGPT-like system contains illegal and criminal information, or users improperly use the information generated by ChatGPT-like system, it may also involve corresponding criminal risks. However, ChatGPT-like system does not have the qualification of the subject of criminal responsibility, that is, the subject that may ultimately bear criminal responsibility is not ChatGPT-like system, but the developer or user related to it. In the development and use of ChatGPT-like system, to prevent technical risks and make the technology "good", the developers should fulfill the obligations as guarantors, foresee the possible harmful results caused by ChatGPT-like system as much as possible, and take corresponding countermeasures to prevent them. Users should not intentionally induce ChatGPT-like system to break through the ethical and legal bottom line and output illegal and criminal information. If the developer fails to foresee and prevent ChatGPT-like system from outputting illegal and criminal information to the greatest extent, or the user intentionally induces ChatGPT-like system to output illegal and criminal information, he shall bear corresponding criminal responsibility. From the macro level, when regulating criminal risks involved in ChatGPT-like system, the criminal law principle of modesty should be observed to avoid hindering technological innovation and development. From the micro level, in view of the content and characteristics of criminal risks in ChatGPT-like systems, it is necessary to construct a hierarchical governance mechanism: develop and implement compliance plans through ChatGPT-like system research and development enterprises, and explore preventive governance strategies for the criminal risks; strengthen administrative supervision, and integrate scientific and technological supervision means into administrative supervision system, to reduce the possibility of criminal risks; the use of criminal governance measures must strictly adhere to the precondition that prior legal and regulatory provisions are ineffective, the assessment of criminal illegality must be conducted within the framework of the principle of legality in criminal law, and administrative illegality should not be used to replace criminal illegality.

    Reference
    [1] 蒲清平,向往.生成式人工智能:ChatGPT的变革影响、风险挑战及应对策略[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2023(3):102-114.
    [2] 朱光辉,王喜文.ChatGPT的运行模式、关键技术及未来图景[J].新疆师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2023(4):113-122.
    [3] 姚万勤.对通过新增罪名应对人工智能风险的质疑[J].当代法学,2019(3):3-14.
    [4] 王迁.论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定性[J].法律科学,2017(5):148-155.
    [5] 房慧颖.论人工智能生成内容的法律保护问题[J].山东社会科学,2023(9):179-184.
    [6] 刘宪权.人工智能生成物刑法保护的基础和限度[J].华东政法大学学报,2019(6):60-67.
    [7] 赵广立.ChatGPT敲开通用人工智能大门了吗[N].中国科学报,2023-02-22(03).
    [8] 卡尔·拉伦茨. 法学方法论[M].陈爱娥,译.北京:商务印书馆,2003:279.
    [9] 房慧颖.生成型人工智能的刑事风险与防治策略:以ChatGPT为例[J].南昌大学学报(人文社会科学版),2023(4):52-61.
    [10] 陈兴良.刑法哲学[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004:7.
    [11] 平野龙一.刑法的基础[M].黎宏,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2016:90.
    [12] 储槐植.美国刑法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1987:85.
    [13] 冯亚东.理性主义与刑法模式[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998:10.
    [14] 房慧颖.侵犯数据产品权利行为的刑法认定[J].理论与改革,2024(5):150-160.
    [15] 陈兴良.刑事政策视野中的刑罚结构调整[J].法学研究,1998(6):40-54.
    [16] 平野龙一.刑法总论Ⅰ[M].有斐阁,1972:72.
    [17] 房慧颖.数字平台治理的"两面性"及刑法介入机制[J].华东政法大学学报,2024(5):68-77.
    [18] 房慧颖.数字资产属性的界定及其证成 [J].学术月刊,2024(5):113-122.
    [19] 姜涛.刑法如何应对人工智能带来的风险挑战[N].检察日报,2019-12-07(03).
    [20] 江溯.自动化决策、刑事司法与算法规制:由卢米斯案引发的思考[J].东方法学,2020(3):76-88.
    [21] 沈伟伟.算法透明原则的迷思:算法规制理论的批判[J].环球法律评论,2019(6):20-39.
    [22] 杨庆峰.ChatGPT:特征分析与伦理考察[N].中国社会科学报,2023-03-07(04).
    [23] 刘涛.网络帮助行为刑法不法归责模式:以功能主义为视角[J].政治与法律,2020(3):113-124.
    [24] 杨东,潘曌东.区块链带来金融与法律优化[J].中国金融,2016(8):25-26.
    [25] 房慧颖.数据犯罪刑法规制模式的系统性研判与立体化构建[J].理论与改革,2023(6):78-88.
    [26] 房慧颖.数字经济时代衍生数据财产权的刑法保护机制构建[J].广西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2024(1):194-202.
    Cited by
    Comments
    Comments
    分享到微博
    Submit
Get Citation

房慧颖.类ChatGPT系统的刑事风险与治理路径[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2024,30(6):263~272

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:102
  • PDF: 83
  • HTML: 183
  • Cited by: 0
History
  • Online: February 13,2025
Article QR Code