You raise several good points for discussion, Koo. Ethics vs Governance vs Trust.
1. The term 'Ethical AI' has no meaning – it's a machine, it has no ethics. Ethics belong to the realm of human activities. Unless there is evidence that AI is sentient, we should never be using that term as it obfuscate the issues.
2. Governance is always about good practices and the prevention of abuse. Unless there is real evidence that AI poses an existential threat (empty hollow words at this point by naive government officials looking to virtue signal), governing a technology makes no sense. Nobody governs automation processes. Nobody governs the steam engine. There is governance, or rather, safeguards for nuclear.
3. Widespread adoption of the technology is its own form of 'governance' as counter-opposing forces, driven by capitalistic ideals (i.e. making money rather than cutting the hand that feeds it), will ensure that no single group dominates. This, in turn, reduces asymmetric risks and potential abuse. And this should be at the heart of why TRUST becomes important – to drive widespread usage and adoption.
Thanks Eric for the compliment and raising interesting points, especially on the term “governance”. I never did like the term AI Ethics to begin with and I feel its often quoted by people who needs to be ethical rather which triggered why I believed in AI Professionals Ethics.
I very much agree with point 2 and yes, instead of saying governance, we should rather be looking at building safeguards. For instance, in terms of using AI in weapons and decision making that directly take lives away. Which we can argue that recommending safeguards is part of governance?
Point 3 is really the crux of why I feel building trust is more important rather than all these talks abt AI Ethics (BS imo) and AI Governance.
Again, very much appreciated for sharing your viewpoints and again much food for thought on my learning/research journey on building trustworthy AI. Thank you! :)
This is all fine and good, but the use of GenAI will precede regulation and legislation by years. In the interim, we need action by professionals, humans, who are themselves trustworthy. This is more important than standing up a process and telling people to trust it...
You raise several good points for discussion, Koo. Ethics vs Governance vs Trust.
1. The term 'Ethical AI' has no meaning – it's a machine, it has no ethics. Ethics belong to the realm of human activities. Unless there is evidence that AI is sentient, we should never be using that term as it obfuscate the issues.
2. Governance is always about good practices and the prevention of abuse. Unless there is real evidence that AI poses an existential threat (empty hollow words at this point by naive government officials looking to virtue signal), governing a technology makes no sense. Nobody governs automation processes. Nobody governs the steam engine. There is governance, or rather, safeguards for nuclear.
3. Widespread adoption of the technology is its own form of 'governance' as counter-opposing forces, driven by capitalistic ideals (i.e. making money rather than cutting the hand that feeds it), will ensure that no single group dominates. This, in turn, reduces asymmetric risks and potential abuse. And this should be at the heart of why TRUST becomes important – to drive widespread usage and adoption.
Thanks Eric for the compliment and raising interesting points, especially on the term “governance”. I never did like the term AI Ethics to begin with and I feel its often quoted by people who needs to be ethical rather which triggered why I believed in AI Professionals Ethics.
I very much agree with point 2 and yes, instead of saying governance, we should rather be looking at building safeguards. For instance, in terms of using AI in weapons and decision making that directly take lives away. Which we can argue that recommending safeguards is part of governance?
Point 3 is really the crux of why I feel building trust is more important rather than all these talks abt AI Ethics (BS imo) and AI Governance.
Again, very much appreciated for sharing your viewpoints and again much food for thought on my learning/research journey on building trustworthy AI. Thank you! :)
History has shown us time and again that the people harping on about "ethics" are usually the people who lack them the most.
My take is individuals should also learn to differentiate, to inoculate themselves from the BS...there is only so many people we can "save". :)
This is all fine and good, but the use of GenAI will precede regulation and legislation by years. In the interim, we need action by professionals, humans, who are themselves trustworthy. This is more important than standing up a process and telling people to trust it...