On February 6th, Dr. Joe Vukov spoke on the ethical questions that human-like AI algorithms pose, both in terms of the potential for AI rights as well as violations of existing human rights. Dr. Vukov does hold a “better safe than sorry” philosophy on AI development due to its unprecedented capabilities. However, he pointed out to Loyola Neuroscience students that there are important aspects of the human mind that cannot yet be replicated by lines of code. He stated that “the [human] mind cannot be totally computational”, indicating that the intricacies of human physiology leave much to be desired when it comes to AI’s ability as an authentic imitation, indistinguishable from the real thing.
Dr. Vukov would likely agree that such rapid advancements in technology leave modern society in a tough spot; the potential of artificial intelligence is formidable, yes, but what can we reasonably trust it to handle by itself? This question becomes particularly daunting when one considers AI’s tendency to discriminate against people of color in business scenarios (Appleseeds to Apples: Catholicism and The Next ChatGPT).
Erik Hermann, Gizem Yalcin Williams, and Stefano Puntoni address similar ethical concerns in an article published in the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science: Deploying Artificial Intelligence in Services to AID Vulnerable Consumers. Their research indicates that AI can be used to serve vulnerable consumers with “socially responsible business practices” (Hermann, et al.) due to its dynamic learning capabilities. In the realm of business, adaptability is an essential skill to have in order to keep up with consumer behaviors and needs. Their framework, in particular, focuses on “accessible, interactive, and dynamic AI technologies [which] can empower vulnerable consumers by providing accessible services, optimizing service experiences, and enhancing consumer decision-making”. (Hermann, et al.)
Considering the myriad of views held by experts in both psychology and business, among other sectors, it seems that we exist in a period of necessary growth, change, and moral questioning. When is it acceptable to sacrifice the safety net of a human mind for the efficiency of AI? Perhaps in the future, the answers to such questions will become clearer.
No comments:
Post a Comment