IT documents comes with different names such as the following: - Manual or handbook, - Policies and procedures, - Management systems, - Project plans. In the real world we have various names with unique descriptions and purposes when in fact they could be made to do a uniform direction for which actions are based for the entire IT initiatives, probably the longest in IT lifecycle is operation. The problem is our inclination on something else which is wrong. IT remains an IT area. Business remains a business area. The same problem is carried out when we conduct IT audit. Most audit are missing the gists in which IT is being used by businesses. We once said that an effective IT audit is conducted by IT people themselves but there is something wrong with that even. Business and accounting people have been doing it with a different bias and preconceived notions which doesn't make the cut for IT direction and audit respectively. Leaders play the same game and so the problem continues an
Why is it that we always place regulation as a responsibility, most primarily, of governments?
We think self-regulation has been of human's mode since the beginning of time, and entities working on advance technology or in the case of AIs, that without the usual apparent oversight, shall know their own work better and its effect and implications, if any, more than anybody else.
Did we always say, honesty is the best policy? In AI self-regulation, whether it's done by the AI enterprise itself or within its industry, that will be definitively brooding.
What do you think? (We will update this shortly but you can comment now.)
Comments