skip to main content
10.1145/3571884.3603751acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Risk and Harm: Unpacking Ideologies in the AI Discourse

Published:19 July 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

We examine the ideological differences in the debate surrounding large language models (LLMs) and AI regulation, focusing on the contrasting positions of the Future of Life Institute (FLI) and the Distributed AI Research (DAIR) institute. The study employs a humanistic HCI methodology, applying narrative theory to HCI-related topics and analyzing the political differences between FLI and DAIR, as they are brought to bear on research on LLMs. Two conceptual lenses, “existential risk” and “ongoing harm,” are applied to reveal differing perspectives on AI's societal and cultural significance. Adopting a longtermist perspective, FLI prioritizes preventing existential risks, whereas DAIR emphasizes addressing ongoing harm and human rights violations. The analysis further discusses these organizations’ stances on risk priorities, AI regulation, and attribution of responsibility, ultimately revealing the diverse ideological underpinnings of the AI and LLMs debate. Our analysis highlights the need for more studies of longtermism's impact on vulnerable populations, and we urge HCI researchers to consider the subtle yet significant differences in the discourse on LLMs.

References

  1. Anne Adams, Peter Lunt, and Paul Cairns. 2008. A qualititative approach to HCI research. In Research Methods for Human-Computer Interaction, Paul Cairns and Anna Cox (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 138–157. Retrieved July 27, 2016 from http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521870122&ss=tocGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Carol J. Adams, Alice Crary, and Lori Gruen. 2023. The Good It Promises, the Harm It Does: Critical Essays on Effective Altruism. New York, US: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2015. Humanistic HCI. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 8, 4: 1–185. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00664ED1V01Y201508HCI031Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Nicholas Beckstead. 2013. On the overwhelming importance of shaping the far future. Ph.D. thesis Rutgers University. https://doi.org/10.7282/T35M649TGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Emily M. Bender, Timnit Gebru, Angelina McMillan-Major, and Shmargaret Shmitchell. 2021. On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’21), 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ruha Benjamin. 2019. Race after technology: abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Polity, Medford, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nick Bostrom. 2002. Existential risks: analyzing human extinction scenarios and related hazards. Journal of Evolution and Technology 9. Retrieved April 4, 2023 from https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:827452c3-fcba-41b8-86b0-407293e6617cGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Nick Bostrom. 2003. Astronomical waste: The opportunity cost of delayed technological development. Utilitas 15, 3: 308–314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Nick Bostrom. 2009. The Future of Humanity. In New Waves in Philosophy of Technology, Jan Kyrre Berg Olsen, Evan Selinger and Søren Riis (eds.). Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, 186–215. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230227279_10Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Nick Bostrom. 2013. Why I Want to be a Posthuman When I Grow Up. In The Transhumanist Reader. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 28–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118555927.ch3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Victoria Braun and Virginia Clarke. 2014. Thematic analysis. In Qualitative Research in Clinical and Health Psychology, Poul Rohleder and Antonia Lyons (eds.). Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Therese Budniakiewicz. 1992. Fundamentals of Story Logic: Introduction to Greimassian Semiotics. John Benjamins Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Shaan Chopra, Emma Dixon, Kausalya Ganesh, Alisha Pradhan, Mary L. Radnofsky, and Amanda Lazar. 2021. Designing for and with People with Dementia using a Human Rights-Based Approach. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’21), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3443434Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Luigi De Angelis, Francesco Baglivo, Guglielmo Arzilli, Gaetano Pierpaolo Privitera, Paolo Ferragina, Alberto Eugenio Tozzi, and Caterina Rizzo. 2023. ChatGPT and the Rise of Large Language Models: The New AI-Driven Infodemic Threat in Public Health. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4352931Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Eva A. M. van Dis, Johan Bollen, Willem Zuidema, Robert van Rooij, and Claudi L. Bockting. 2023. ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature 614, 7947: 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Virginia Eubanks. 2017. Automating inequality: how high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Luciano Floridi and Massimo Chiriatti. 2020. GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences. Minds and Machines 30, 4: 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Batya Friedman, Peter H. Kahn, Alan Borning, and Alina Huldtgren. 2013. Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. In Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory, Neelke Doorn, Daan Schuurbiers, Ibo van de Poel and Michael E. Gorman (eds.). Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 55–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Future of Life Institute. 2023. Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter. Future of Life Institute. Retrieved March 29, 2023 from https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Alessandro Gabbiadini, Ognibene Dimitri, Cristina Baldissarri, and Anna Manfredi. 2023. Does ChatGPT Pose a Threat to Human Identity? SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4377900Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Timnit Gebru, Emily M. Bender, Angelina McMillan-Major, and Margaret Mitchell. 2023. Statement from the listed authors of Stochastic Parrots on the “AI pause” letter. DAIR. Retrieved March 31, 2023 from https://www.dair-institute.org/blog/letter-statement-March2023Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Nico Grant. 2023. Google Devising Radical Search Changes to Beat Back A.I. Rivals. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/16/technology/google-search-engine-ai.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Nico Grant and Cade Metz. 2023. Google Releases Bard, Its Competitor in the Race to Create A.I. Chatbots. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/21/technology/google-bard-chatbot.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Jamie Grierson. 2023. Photographer admits prize-winning image was AI-generated. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/apr/17/photographer-admits-prize-winning-image-was-ai-generatedGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Kalley Huang. 2023. Why Pope Francis Is the Star of A.I.-Generated Photos. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/technology/ai-photos-pope-francis.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Italian SA authority. 2023. ChatGPT: OpenAI reinstates service in Italy with enhanced transparency and rights for european users and non-users. Retrieved from https://www.garanteprivacy.it:443/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/9881490Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Enkelejda Kasneci, Kathrin Sessler, Stefan Küchemann, Maria Bannert, Daryna Dementieva, Frank Fischer, Urs Gasser, Georg Groh, Stephan Günnemann, Eyke Hüllermeier, Stepha Krusche, Gitta Kutyniok, Tilman Michaeli, Claudia Nerdel, Jürgen Pfeffer, Oleksandra Poquet, Michael Sailer, Albrecht Schmidt, Tina Seidel, Matthias Stadler, Jochen Weller, Jochen Kuhn, and Gjergji Kasneci. 2023. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences 103: 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Daniel Martin Katz, Michael James Bommarito, Shang Gao, and Pablo Arredondo. 2023. GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4389233Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Reuben Kirkham. 2020. Using European Human Rights Jurisprudence for Incorporating Values into Design. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395539Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Steve Lohr. 2023. A.I. Is Coming for Lawyers, Again. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/10/technology/ai-is-coming-for-lawyers-again.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Dieuwertje Luitse and Wiebke Denkena. 2021. The great Transformer: Examining the role of large language models in the political economy of AI. Big Data & Society 8, 2: 20539517211047736. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211047734Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. William MacAskill. 2022. What we owe the future. Hachette, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Lorna McGregor, Daragh Murray, and Vivian Ng. 2019. International Human Rights Law As A Framework For Algorithmic Accountability. International & Comparative Law Quarterly 68, 2: 309–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589319000046Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Kris McGuffie and Alex Newhouse. 2020. The Radicalization Risks of GPT-3 and Advanced Neural Language Models. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2009.06807Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Cade Metz and Karen Weise. 2023. A Tech Race Begins as Microsoft Adds A.I. to Its Search Engine. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/07/technology/microsoft-ai-chatgpt-bing.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Christopher Mims. 2023. AI Tech Enables Industrial-Scale Intellectual-Property Theft, Say Critics. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/ai-chatgpt-dall-e-microsoft-rutkowski-github-artificial-intelligence-11675466857Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Marina Moreno. 2023. Does longtermism depend on questionable forms of aggregation? Intergenerational Justice Review, 1: 13–23. https://doi.org/10.24357/igjr.8.1.996Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Siobhan O'Connor and ChatGPT. 2023. Open artificial intelligence platforms in nursing education: Tools for academic progress or abuse? Nurse Education in Practice 66: 103537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103537Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Toby Ord. 2021. The precipice: existential risk and the future of humanity. Bloomsbury Academic, London New York (N.Y.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Rich Pelley. 2023. ‘We got bored waiting for Oasis to re-form’: AIsis, the band fronted by an AI Liam Gallagher. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/apr/18/oasis-aisis-band-fronted-by-an-ai-liam-gallagherGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Margaret Mitchell, Timnit Gebru, and Iason Gabriel. 2022. A Human Rights-Based Approach to Responsible AI. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.02667Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Jürgen Rudolph, Samson Tan, and Shannon Tan. 2023. ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching 6, 1. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Katharine Sanderson. 2023. GPT-4 is here: what scientists think. Nature 615, 7954: 773–773. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00816-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Adam Satariano. 2023. ChatGPT Is Banned in Italy Over Privacy Concerns. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/31/technology/chatgpt-italy-ban.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Chirag Shah and Emily M. Bender. 2022. Situating Search. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (CHIIR ’22), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1145/3498366.3505816Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Filipo Sharevski, Jennifer Vander Loop, Peter Jachim, Amy Devine, and Emma Pieroni. 2023. Talking Abortion (Mis)information with ChatGPT on TikTok. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2303.13524Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Ahmed Tlili, Boulus Shehata, Michael Agyemang Adarkwah, Aras Bozkurt, Daniel T. Hickey, Ronghuai Huang, and Brighter Agyemang. 2023. What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments 10, 1: 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Adrienne Williams, Milagros Miceli, and Timnit Gebru. 2022. The Exploited Labor Behind Artificial Intelligence. Noema. Retrieved from https://www.noemamag.com/the-exploited-labor-behind-artificial-intelligenceGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Eliezer Yudkowsky. 2023. Pausing AI Developments Isn't Enough. We Need to Shut it All Down. Time. Retrieved April 11, 2023 from https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-not-enough/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Shoshana Zuboff. 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Risk and Harm: Unpacking Ideologies in the AI Discourse

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              CUI '23: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces
              July 2023
              504 pages
              ISBN:9798400700149
              DOI:10.1145/3571884

              Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 19 July 2023

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • extended-abstract
              • Research
              • Refereed limited

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate34of100submissions,34%

              Upcoming Conference

              CUI '24
              ACM Conversational User Interfaces 2024
              July 8 - 10, 2024
              Luxembourg , Luxembourg
            • Article Metrics

              • Downloads (Last 12 months)257
              • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)33

              Other Metrics

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader

            HTML Format

            View this article in HTML Format .

            View HTML Format