There is a crisis coming in academia. It’s been looming on
the horizon for quite some time, and now threatens to bring the profession into
That problem is AI.
For many years now, AI have been used to power chat bots and
digital assistants such as Cortana, Siri and Alexa. Over the years, these bots
have become far more nuanced and complex. While these systems aren’t
intelligent in the same way as a human being, they do a fairly good job at
mimicking human behaviour, and convincing us that they are ‘real’.
Indeed, these technologies are now so convincing that it
won’t be long before they are put to nefarious use. It’s already been shown
can write convincing news articles, and it won’t be long before they are
used to write academic essays, even more complex works such as research papers
and even full-length publications.
Make no mistake, this is a serious issue, and one that needs to be taken seriously. In the next few years, AI-powered essay mills have the potential to shake academia right to the very core.
Humans will always make the final decision on whether armed robots can shoot, according to a statement by the US Department of Defense. Their clarification comes amid fears about a new advanced targeting system, known as ATLAS, that will use artificial intelligence in combat vehicles to target and execute threats. While the public may feel uneasy about so-called “killer robots”, the concept is nothing new – machine-gun wielding “SWORDS” robots were deployed in Iraq as early as 2007.
But our relationship with military robots goes back even further than that. This is because when we say ‘robot’, what we really mean is a technology with some form of ‘autonomous’ element that allows it to perform a task without the need for direct human intervention.
After several months of hard work, I’m pleased to announce
the launch of the In The Zone
podcast, featuring interesting chat with me (Mike Ryder) and my friend and
colleague, Josh Hughes.
The idea is that each week, Josh and I will chat about
something interesting that we’ve been reading about, or that’s appearing in the
news. We will also be interviewing fellow researchers about their interests and
the impact of their work.
Just over a year ago now, I published the results of a small survey I shared with my followers on Facebook. The idea was to test a few theories I had been working on around ethics and the relative value we assign different forms of life. In this case, I was specifically interested in how we think about animal life, and how we respond to different species when it comes to decisions around life and death.
Even though my survey was relatively small, the results were quite remarkable, and show a clear trend in responses that favour saving larger and more ‘noble’ animals, over smaller, ‘less intelligent’ animals that may be perceived to be in some way less worthy. While a utilitarian perspective should in theory show that the save/kill decisions made by respondents should be weighted equally across five different species of farmyard animal (each life is, after all, of equal ‘value’), respondents very clearly favoured saving a single horse over a single chicken. This trend continued when participants were asked to choose between saving a single horse or five chickens, with many respondents still opting to save the horse, while many respondents would much prefer to kill five chickens, instead of a single horse.
If there’s one thing I’ve learnt during my PhD it’s that truth is very often stranger than fiction.
I’ve just recently finished reading Thomas M. Disch’s Camp Concentration (1968), in which prisoners in the United States are injected with a form of syphilis in order to boost their intelligence. Strange as this may sound, it’s nothing compared with real life.
In 1972, whistle-blower Peter Buxtun revealed the that the US Public Health Service had been conducting secret studies on African-Americans, in the now infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment. The study started in 1932 and ran for over 40 years without the participants knowing they had the disease, and without them ever being treated with penicillin.
Of course, Disch couldn’t have known about the Tuskegee experiments when he was writing in the 1960s, but this revelation sure does make you think. Continue reading