There is something deeply comedic about A.I organisations that are backed by billionaires, constantly screaming "Ethics".
Responsible Research and the Human Brain Project - talk by Nikolas Rose
Opinion on Responsible Dual Use from the Human Brain Project:
This advertising for a swiss private bank perfectly expresses the meaning of "responsibility" (ethics, governance, transparency, ecology, etc.) in late capitalism. #Ethics
"Ethical Autonomous Algorithms" - A few chapters Matthieu Cherubini wrote during his PhD: https://medium.com/@mchrbn/ethical-autonomous-algorithms-5ad07c311bcc #ML #Ethics
Interviewed him & the guys at @automato_farm a while back, touching on related topics:
Walmart's Future Workforce: Robots and Freelancers:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/04/walmarts-future-workforce-robots-and-freelancers/557063/ "Walmart is raising wages, but its plans to use more gig labor and automation put workers at a disadvantage". #Robot #Politics #Ethics
Leading AI researchers threaten Korean university with boycott over its work on ‘killer robots’: https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/4/17196818/ai-boycot-killer-robots-kaist-university-hanwha and https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/05/killer-robots-south-korea-university-boycott-artifical-intelligence-hanwha #ML #Robot #Ethics #Military
Excerpts from "The Revolution of Hope: Toward a Humanized Technology"
Abstract: Most known technology serves to ingeniously adapt the world to the physical and mental limitations of human beings. Humankind has acquired awesome power with its rather limited means. Nanotechnological capabilities further this power. On some accounts, however, nanotechnological research will contribute to a rather different kind of technological development, namely one that changes human beings so as to remove or reduce their physical and mental limitations.
The prospect of this technological development has inspired a fair amount of ethical debate. Here, proponents and opponents of such visions of human enhancement are criticized alike for engaging in speculative ethics. This critique exposes a general pattern that extends to other nano-, bio-, or neuroethical debates.
While it does not apply to all discussions of “enhancement technologies” it does apply to all ethical discourse that constructs and validates an incredible future which it only then proceeds to endorse or critique. This discourse violates conditions of intelligibility, squanders the scarce and valuable resource of ethical concern, and misleads by casting remote possibilities or philosophical thoughtexperiments as foresight about likely technical developments. In effect, it deflects consideration from the transformative technologies of the present.
The report was written by 26 authors from 14 institutions, spanning academia, civil society, and industry. The report builds on a 2 day workshop held in Oxford, UK, in February 2017. More information can be found in Appendix A of the report.