# data[].attributes.body
Indentify the actions that the author (https://commons.com.ua/en/livi-povinni-zminiti-pidhid-do-tehnologichnoyi-politiki/) proposes us to take in order to attain an AI that we deserve (and we deserve better!)

# data[].attributes.body
After reading “Modern Left Must Fundamentally Change Tech Policy Approach,” I have a complex about using any social networking sites or even using technology in general. I think ignorance about such things is convenient, and better than overthinking if my privacy has been violated or not. The author, in short, wants all government laws to become like Icelandic law to protect encryption among individuals. To use better Internet, the Internet must be available faster and cheaper than it is now instead of massive technological development. I believe that this point is important. Under capitalism, the minority develops, and the majority remains as they are. With the development of technology, the majority face many difficulties in developing with technological development. In order to have a better life and a life that we are worthy of, we must get rid of our current life. We find racism in everything. As the world develops, our ideas about discrimination and racism have become more filthy.

# data[].attributes.body
In the 21st century, technology is growing quickly and changing our lives in exciting ways. AI is becoming a part of our daily routines, helping with learning, studying, and working. 3D printing is now advanced enough to build houses efficiently. Social media connects people from all around the world. Meanwhile, robotics and drones are revolutionizing fields like medicine and military operations. It’s incredible to see how much technology is improving our world.

To create an AI that truly benefits everyone, the article suggests a few important steps. First, we should support open-source software (FOSS) to make digital services more transparent and trustworthy. Next, we need to update copyright laws to give creators control over their work while still allowing free access for non-commercial use. The article also recommends banning digital rights management (DRM) so companies can’t limit how we use media we’ve bought. We should back publicly owned digital libraries to ensure everyone can access them. Lastly, it’s important to have clear and open methods for handling data in public services.

# data[].attributes.body
Ilias Akhmedov’s article “Modern Left Must Fundamentally Change Tech Policy Approach” argues that our current tech rules need a big change. He says big tech companies have too much power, and we should share that power more with smaller groups and communities.

One good idea is to use open-source software and work together on projects. Open-source means people collaborate openly to create fairer tech tools that help everyone, not just big companies. Governments can help by using open-source software in public services, making sure technology paid for by taxpayers’ benefits everyone.

We also need better rules to protect gig workers who often have unstable jobs and don’t get fair pay or benefits. We should make sure they get fair wages, benefits, and job security. Supporting platforms owned by workers can give them more say in their work and how they get paid.

Lastly, teaching people about digital rights and making sure everyone can use technology is important. We should teach about online privacy and make sure everyone can afford and use fast internet. These steps will help make sure technology is fair and everyone has a chance to benefit from it.

# data[].attributes.body
Ilias Akhmedov highlights the fields where unsympathetic implementation of AI has created problems - with real cases.

As listed at the end of the article:

-Ensuring easy accessibility for public services that do not strain citizens’ budgets. The most striking example for me was the situation with the Internet Archive. Despite having read several books in the Archive, I had no idea about all the lawsuits and conflicts. The loss of 500,000 books is already a missed opportunity for learning. Among concerns of financial justice for authors and access of art to common people, to concentrate rights and money in the hands of publishers is a lose-lose situation for creatives and the public alike.

Transparency in governance, service implementation, and data management affecting civilians.

Here the decision in sight is to learn from an example of successful cases of implementation of such policies and protective measures. At the very first, more recognition and knowledge among users about data collection.

- protection of the people’s privacy and its treatment as a fundamental human right;

Here possibilities are overpowerment through elections of a party with a goal to advance policy of privacy protection. Another way might be boycotting companies that take it to more extremes than others, however, i don't see it as a very viable option. First problem is whether the public would care enough, and the second comes from a knowledge of the digital market “requirements for success” in a technological era. For a company, data collection is a big source of money and potential for good deals with other businesses, as well as better algorithms in their own product. But once again, there are less privacy-destroying ways to treat collectible data, as well as the possibility to have a transparent policy.

- the clear opposition to indiscriminate surveillance policies and technology that enable it

Once again, representative political parties, this one also seems heavily situation-dependent to me. The difficulty of preventing implementation of those systems would vary depending on a country’s status(war/peace/tense situation) rejime(level of authoritarianism/democracy) technological advancements, crime rate, etc. Look at China, for example, the war was not needed there to implement a system.

(Other things i noticed:

Ilias Akhmedov mostly addresses the left parties and insists that they should be more active and cautious and demand

So they would keep watch so ai won't be implemented as a tool to end democracy.

He also warns of biased models used by forces, police that create false arrests and accusations.

So it's about surveillance, about education, about transparency of usage and implementation of systems by government

He also discusses the powerplay and the reasons why the party those policy on tech control he deems right lost on elections)

# data[].attributes.body
To attain the AI that we deserve, the author proposes several key actions. First, advocating for the use of open-source software in public services ensures transparency and accessibility, aligning with socialist values of fairness and equal opportunity. Secondly, promoting policies that protect personal data, such as GDPR and regulations on AI, safeguards individuals' privacy rights and ensures ethical practices in technology development. Thirdly, fostering collaboration between socialist parties, tech advocacy groups like La Quadrature Du Net and EFF, and remaining Pirate Party members can strengthen the voice for progressive tech policies across Europe. Finally, emphasizing the importance of digital rights, including the right to repair and fair competition laws, ensures that AI and technology advancements benefit everyone, not just corporations.

In my opinion, I think these actions are crucial for creating a fair and transparent digital future. Protecting personal data and ensuring equal access to technology are essential for safeguarding individual rights in the digital age. I see the importance of collaboration between political parties and advocacy groups to effectively advocate for these policies. I wonder how these initiatives will evolve and if they will gain enough support to influence broader policy changes. Overall, prioritizing ethics and fairness in AI development is not just necessary but also a moral imperative for ensuring a better future for all.