<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>AI Policy on SoloSoft</title><link>https://www.solosoft.dev/tags/ai-policy/</link><description>Recent content in AI Policy on SoloSoft</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://www.solosoft.dev/tags/ai-policy/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Indonesia Actively Participates in Global AI Governance： How the Developing Worl</title><link>https://www.solosoft.dev/trends/2026-04-21-ri-ready-to-become-partner-in-establishing-global-/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.solosoft.dev/trends/2026-04-21-ri-ready-to-become-partner-in-establishing-global-/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="why-does-an-ai-declaration-from-a-southeast-asian-nation-make-global-tech-giants-uneasy"&gt;Why Does an AI Declaration from a Southeast Asian Nation Make Global Tech Giants Uneasy?&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Direct answer:&lt;/strong&gt; Because Indonesia represents not just one country, but the collective demand of the entire &amp;ldquo;Global South&amp;rdquo; for a voice in tech governance. Its massive digital population, rapidly growing ICT infrastructure, and strategic position as a key manufacturing and data hub give its stance tangible negotiating leverage, enough to influence the rules for future AI products entering emerging markets.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over the past decade, global AI governance discourse has been largely dominated by three camps: &lt;strong&gt;the US&amp;rsquo;s innovation-driven model&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;the EU&amp;rsquo;s risk-regulation model&lt;/strong&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;China&amp;rsquo;s state-led model&lt;/strong&gt;. While these frameworks differ, they are essentially based on the conditions and values of developed economies. As AI applications deeply penetrate populous nations like Indonesia, India, and Nigeria, governance blind spots become glaringly apparent—issues these regions care most about, such as &amp;ldquo;bridging the digital divide,&amp;rdquo; &amp;ldquo;local employment impacts,&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;safeguarding data sovereignty,&amp;rdquo; often become marginal footnotes in existing frameworks.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>White House Releases National AI Policy Framework</title><link>https://www.solosoft.dev/trends/white-house-ai-policy-framework-20260329/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.solosoft.dev/trends/white-house-ai-policy-framework-20260329/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;For the past three years, American AI companies have operated in a regulatory wilderness: no federal law governing AI, a growing patchwork of state-level bills, and the constant threat that a California or Texas regulation could reshape national product decisions overnight. On March 23, 2026, that era formally ended.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The White House released the National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence, the first comprehensive federal document to establish unified rules for how AI systems can be built, deployed, and governed across the United States. The framework does not wait for Congress to pass legislation; it uses existing executive authority to set agency-level standards and signals a clear legislative direction for AI governance at the national level.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>