We can debate the ethics of AI but can’t seem to change course | Letters
A reader responds to The Guardian's profile of Google DeepMind philosopher, expressing concern that AI's trajectory may be set by commercial and geopolitical incentives rather than societal debate.
Readers respond to the profile of Iason Gabriel, a philosopher and research scientist at Google DeepMind
The Guardian’s profile of Google DeepMind’s philosopher was encouraging because it showed how seriously many of the people building AI are taking their ethical responsibilities (‘There’s this deep mystery of what, actually, is this thing?’: the philosopher inside Google DeepMind AI, 30 June). Yet it also left me wondering whether the most important decision has already been made.
The article asks whose moral compass should guide artificial intelligence. My concern is that the direction of travel may already have been set, not by philosophers or engineers, but by the incentives surrounding the technology. Hundreds of billions are now being invested because AI promises commercial returns and geopolitical advantage. Those pressures are understandable, but they are also quietly determining the future before society has consciously debated where it wants to go.
Continue reading...