Artificial Intelligence, Gender, and Oppression

Kerr, Alison Duncan

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-95687-9_107

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, it is framed as a "silver bullet" to alleviate us from our labour and complex social problems (Leufer, 2020). On the other hand, great concerns are also expressed, in that AI can be a means to oppress people (Erscoi et al, 2023;Kerr, 2021) or because it stands at risk of moving beyond our control (such as with the paperclip maximiser, see e.g. Murphy, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Intelligence

Van der Gun,

Guest

2024

JHTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applications of artificial intelligence (AI) are able to optimise our lives par excellence, and it is clear that this will only increase as time passes. In many ways, this is very promising, but the forms that AI takes in our society have also sparked many concerns about dehumanisation. What is often recognised is that AI systems implicitly exert social power relations—whether intentionally or not, as might be the case with bias—such that the danger would be gone if only we improved our models and uncovered this hidden realm of intentional oppression. However, these views overlook the possibility that detrimental consequences may also arise precisely because AI is able to attain favourable goals flawlessly. This problem of adverse side effects, which are strictly accidental to the goals we set for AI to effectuate, is explored through the notion of “non-intentional dehumanisation”. To articulate this phenomenon, this essay consists of two parts. The first part will establish how naive AI usage presents a paradigmatic case of this problem. In the second part, we will argue that these issues occur in a two-fold fashion; not only does AI risk inducing harm to the “used-upon”, but also to the user. It is with this conceptual model that awareness may be brought to the counter side of our ready acceptance of AI solutions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Intelligence

Van der Gun,

Guest

2024

JHTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is a discourse between advocates of AI on the one hand, that frame it as a "silver bullet" to alleviate us from our labour and complex social problems (Leufer, 2020), and its con-tenders on the other. Here, light is shed on its potential to oppress people (Crawford, 2021;Kerr, 2021;Sartori and Bocca, 2023;Erscoi et al, 2023), or simply that it will move beyond our control (such as with the paperclip maximiser, see e.g. Murphy, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Intelligence: Panacea or Non-intentional Dehumanisation?

van der Gun,

Guest

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It goes without saying that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is at the pinnacle of our technological advancements. We have created intelligent systems that are held to vastly outperform certain human capacities, and it is clear that this will only increase as time passes. In many ways this is very promising, but the forms that technology and AI take in our society has also sparked many concerns of dehumanisation. The intentional form dehumanisation has started to receive some recognition as of late, a view that propagates that dehumanisation would be gone if only we rule out the underlying malicious intentions for oppression. Yet, such a view glosses over the fact that dehumanisation might also occur when a seemingly positive goal is perfectly reached. As such, we propose the notion of “non-intentional dehumanisation” to describe this alternative side of dehumanisation, of which naive AI usage is a paradigmatic case. We further elaborate it to take two forms; not only does AI risk dehumanising the “used-upon” (a denial of humanness), but also the user (a deprivation of humanness). The present paper will end by synthesising a model that lists (and exemplifies) the potential causes and effects that pertain to this phenomenon. This conceptual model of non-intentional dehumanisation could prove useful to bring awareness to the counter side to our ready acceptance of AI solutions

show abstract