With that argument one of my colleagues triggered a debate on artificial intelligence in February 2019 as AI affects the daily life of each and every human. Impressed by the consequence I took some notes (1) and summarised the lesson for myself.
I dare you human, not AI.
Computers meanwhile get the better scores than humans in interpreting pictures and photographies, which indeed is a clear advantage in the case of screening cancer. Your radiologist might become tired, their artificial counterpart will not—24 hours a day.
Example number one (1).
I dare you human, not AI.
Your face discriminates you against some ethnical peculiarities. At the ticket machine you will be faced, then sentenced “Your purchase has been stopped.” And no further word to be read in this bible.
Example number two (1).
I dare you human, not AI.
We can be sure, that
AI per se is innocent,
and human bias it
for selfish purpose.
I dare you human, not AI.
What is your arguments on social scoring? (2)
“AI between utopia and dystopia?” (1)
What are politicians going to do?
Who algorhythmed our lives?
What can be done?
I dare you human, not AI.
“The debate on ethics is mandatory.” (1) Politicians are in the line of arguments, but silence still is painful to our ear. Finally, answers are available (3, 4), and Ethic Guidelines (5) shall become a legal basis.
As AI is a “technique of dual use” (1) wise humans will agree on regulations. Otherwise we are facing the risk “to sacrifice our values (6) on the altar of competitiveness.” (1)
Appreciate you human, and AI.
Appreciate the “human-centric approach” (5), and negotiate legal commitments and implement regulative obligations.
AI would catch you anyway, my colleague said. (1)
XAIPE, SteVe.
2019-05-30
Further readings and explanatory notes
(1) Translations of quotations are by myself, and misunderstandings are my solely responsibility.
(2) I am aware of the plural, and gave way to the allure of squeezing “[the bundle of] your arguments” into singular.
(3) Cédric Villani, 2018, For a Meaningful Artificial Intelligence
(4) My colleague gave further reference to the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and their respective publications.
(5) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Building Trust in Human-Centric Artificial Intelligence, Brussels, 8.4.2019, COM(2019) 168 final
(6) European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, Artt. 1 to 18
[7] “When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.”
[8] Thanks to Mr. David Ott, who drew my attention on the OECD Principles on AI.
Photo credit
Picture and Photo by the author.
