I would say, as things are now, this is a tough question. Normally this would go through electing local and national representatives who you agree with, but it is difficult to know exactly how most politicians think about AI. Maybe a general stance toward big tech companies is a good proxy for how much AI nonsense a politician is willing to accept. But it is an important question. From an optimistic point of view, introducing AI into government and the public sector gives an unprecedented opportunity to impact how things are done. For instance, it is obvious that case workers in public institutions carry with them biases that will unavoidably affect the way they make decisions. This bias is very difficult to change and difficult to measure. But we can measure the bias of algorithms and decide to change them so they are less biased and more fair.
Yes, ordinary citizens absolutely have a role in shaping AI regulation. In democratic systems, regulation ultimately reflects political priorities, and politicians are accountable to voters. However, meaningful participation begins with awareness. Citizens need to understand how AI is being used in daily life, what benefits it offers, and where potential risks may arise. Informed citizens can support political representatives at local, national, and European levels who align with their views on AI governance. Beyond voting, citizens can participate in public consultations, submit formal opinions, engage in debates, and collaborate with NGOs, think tanks, and advocacy networks working on AI ethics and safety. At Life With Artificials, for example, we engage with alliances and institutions that contribute to policy discussions around responsible AI development. Citizens can also use social media and direct communication channels to engage policymakers, who are increasingly accessible and transparent. Importantly, collective civic engagement balances the influence of corporate lobbying. When citizens organize, share informed perspectives, and publicly express their concerns or support, they shape the political environment in which regulation is drafted. Democratic pressure matters. An informed, vocal society is a decisive force in ensuring AI regulation reflects human values rather than narrow interests.
The regulation of artificial intelligence is an issue that affects all of society, making citizen participation in this process not only desirable but necessary. Although these decisions traditionally fall to governments and large corporations, there are various mechanisms through which ordinary citizens can exert their influence. - Public consultations: Many regulatory bodies, such as the European Union, open consultation periods public forums where any citizen can submit allegations and proposals regarding laws. Education and digital literacy: An informed citizenry is better positioned to demand transparency and accountability to businesses and governments. - Digital activism: Social networks and digital platforms allow for making debates visible and putting pressure on institutions and generate public opinion on these issues. - Electoral participation: Support political representatives committed to responsible regulation of AI is a direct way to influence the policies that are adopted.
I believe that the growing power and relevance of artificial intelligence at all levels of society—since it is not limited to younger generations but is also being integrated into the lives of older people—makes it necessary to consider implementing certain regulations in the political sphere. This increase in AI use brings with it inexperienced users, who may make mistakes or act with malicious intent. Such intentions could include deception or fraud. For this reason, I see it as necessary, on one hand, to inform people about the dangers and risks of AI, and on the other hand, to implement some form of regulation. These regulations could include, for example, versions of AI tailored for minors, certain requirements for sharing AI-created works on social media, and always indicating that content has been generated by AI (as I believe is already being done).
The question cannot be answered in general, but depends on the political system of the respective country. Different countries have opted for different systems in terms of citizens' participation. The range is large. Political systems, such as the one adopted by the Swiss Confederation, promote a high degree of direct democracy. Citizens are used to being very comprehensively and directly involved in state decision-making processes. This requires good preparation of the citizens and a lengthy and extensive information process. If citizens are well trained in this respect and have a wealth of experience in direct participation, involvement and participation are to be advocated. The legislature in other countries, such as Austria, on the other hand, is based on the system of representative democracy. Representatives elected by the people at the various political levels are thus tasked with dealing with the decision-making process of all issues affecting the respective bodies and bringing about said decisions, as is also the case with the regulation of AI. In these systems, citizens are indirectly involved in decision-making. Usually, they are also not sufficiently prepared for direct participation to a sufficient extent. The decisions concerning AI should therefore be made in the respective political system concerned.
Even though EU citizens already have an indirect way of affecting the final decision by voting for their representatives, the EU enables direct civic participation through the European Citizens’ Initiative. If an initiative gathers sufficient support from citizens across member states, EU institutions are required to review and respond to the proposal. This can be done online and I myself witnessed a recent parliament hearing that was born out of this mechanism. Local regulations though (country based), would really depend on the country.
From what I understand, ordinary people like me can already have a say in how AI is regulated in the European Union, even if it's not directly. The EU has created a few mechanisms that allow us to have some influence, especially when it comes to transparency and plagiarism. First, the European Commission regularly opens public consultations where any citizen can share their opinion—for example, on what rules should exist for identifying content that is generated by AI. This isn't just a formality; these views are actually used when drafting the laws. Also, if someone finds that their copyright has been violated by AI, there are complaint mechanisms they can use. Similarly, when media outlets publish text generated by AI, they have to declare it—unless a real person takes editorial responsibility for it. Of course, most of these rules will only come into force over the next few years, but overall the EU is already thinking about this and giving us a chance to participate—as long as we keep an eye out for when consultations open or join a civil society group. So ordinary people aren't completely left out of this process.
