These advancements continue to grow exponentially, so does the human dependence on these machines. Artificial Intelligence, during recent times, is one such technology that has been severely impacting the human race. Artificial General Intelligence is the intelligence of a machine that enables it to conduct tasks with the intellectual capacity same as humans such as, personal assistants on phones, virtual voice assistants at homes, etc. In recent times, tech billionaires and innovators are increasingly investing in the field to solve problems, answer questions and thus elevate human conditions. However, there is a growing consensus that AI will potentially lead to severe ethical, political and social problems that demand the attention of the authorities. Artificial Intelligence is often linked to the “Inevitable Singularity Concept,” which is a phenomenon that the sceptics of AI propagate. It is a hypothetical situation whereby AI will overpower and enslave humanity.
The sceptics do not intend to hinder the development of AI but promote the need of governmental regulations to keep it from being used for nefarious purposes. This project strongly propagates the idea of AI being regulated and attempts to challenge the thought of placing the AI-equipped tools in the hands of private individuals and enterprises to avoid human exploitation. Firstly, if AI is regulation-free, it will lead to severe social problems like the infringement of fundamental rights, job collapse, inequality and concentration of wealth, etc. Secondly, the use of AI should be regulated because as machines get smarter, they assume the decision-making process.
Consequently, they engage highly objective algorithms to make decisions which can have far-reaching negative impacts if AI were to be restriction-free. For instance, killing machines that employ AI to choose their targets, to decide when and how much to fire need control to keep them away from people with evil motives. Hence, to grow immune to such dangers, Artificial Intelligence should be regulated to continue reaping its advantages.
127 our experts are availableright now
The authors argue that Artificial Intelligence, though often portrayed as a revolutionary product, entails certain inevitable flaws that could possibly harm the human race. The article briefly explains the idea of Artificial Intelligence as machines intelligent enough to make decisions independent of human instructions, and strongly hints towards the drawbacks by supporting it using expert testimonies from Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak and other tech wizards. The authors include statistical information to strengthen the argument. The authors press for the need for regulation by predicting the future fatality of AI considering its growth rate since its inception.
The authors claim to be optimistic as they hope to transform society into an “AI-rich World” through the correct application of the AI Systems but also stress the need for regulating its use. Thus, the authors maintain a well-rounded approach, nevertheless, they succeed in highlighting the potential threats. I see the argument in this article as the introductory paragraph to my research paper. The article will help me define the term “Artificial Intelligence” and convey my optimism towards its growth. Mentioning the positives of AI, I intend to come forth as unbiased while composing the research paper as the rest of the paper will deal with the pitfalls of AI. The information communicates the message that promoters of AI regulations don’t aim to hinder its progress but instead intend to erase the potential risks and make it thoroughly good. It will help me include expert testimonies and statistical data to engage and develop curiosity amongst the audience.
Thus, the article will help me fulfil every objective of the introductory paragraph. The authors argue that the malicious use of AI will expand the landscape of existing threats, introduce new threats and change the typical characters of threat. The authors identify that the “landscape of threats” will most severely affect the digital, physical and political spheres of society. The authors claim that AI will improve the efficacy and expand labor-intensive cyber-attacks such as spearfishing. The authors propose that the precision in carrying out physical drone attacks will improve; for instance, the use of drones to deploy autonomous machines. The authors stress that the cases involving privacy invasion and social manipulation will be on the rise due to improved techniques of surveillance (data collection), persuasion (targeted propaganda) and deception (creating fake news).
Thus, the article declares all possible threats that AI poses to the end of mankind. I aim at using this detailed analysis to identify problems with AI. This article will help the research cover all the wide-ranging effects that AI can possibly have in the future. I will employ the data from the article in the “problem addressing” body paragraph that will be placed first after the introduction to express the need to regulate it by adopting the solutions in the underlying paragraphs to successfully evade the problems. Categorizing the dangers will allow the audience to better understand its impacts on individual spheres of daily life. The author strongly argues that the facts essential to establish artificial intelligence to be thoroughly beneficial are inadequate by elaborating on the inevitable societal risks that accompany the use of AI. The author identifies two problems with AI and offers insight into two major regulatory solutions that might act as a watchdog for countering those problems.
The author establishes identifiable risks against the fundamental rights of citizens and legal allocation of responsibility. AI is known to make decisions based upon historical knowledge therefore, the author claims that this will lead to discrimination on the grounds of sex, nationality, race, etc. The author proves that the AI-equipped machine’s assumption of responsibility would render the legal system useless as the laws would apply to the makers and not the machines. The author puts forth the idea of complete transparency between the user and the machine about its decision-making ability to allow the user to assign jobs accordingly. He also suggests that AI generated results need to be ignored at times to avoid fundamental rights from being violated. Hence, it is a well-rounded scholarly source that aligns with the project’s purpose. I intend to divide the content of this source into two pieces– the foreseeable problems with AI and the possible dictum to tackle those problems. The problems that the author claims will be a part of a body paragraph after the introduction which will identify all problems concerning AI and the dictums to resolve will be mentioned in a later body paragraph which deals with the resolution of those problems through dictums.
Firstly, the author claims that the AI-equipped machine should obey and respect all the laws that stand true for its operator. This will help the legal system identify AI systems equal to operators, enabling the courts and governmental agencies to hold the operator liable for the crimes committed by the machine. Secondly, the author argues that the AI system should clearly indicate and explicitly disclose that it is not human. This will allow people to identify when the machine is impersonating some human, which in turn will reduce fake news and videos on social media. Thirdly, the author asserts that the AI system, under no condition, should share information with a third party without the explicit consent of the source of information. For instance, house cleaning robots create a map of one’s house and leaking that to a stranger might lead to a crime.
I intend to use the information on the website to introduce the “solutions and ways to regulate” section of the research. The information will help the audience understand the basic structure to be adopted while enacting laws to regulate AI. The information will be placed in the body paragraphs after the identification of problems with AI. This will sufficiently introduce the solutions and help me convince the audience about the validity of the issues and the possible solutions to keep them under check. The author identifies specific pitfalls of current government regulations and declares necessary modifications to the law and the framework to be enacted by the government entities to regulate AI. The article is divided into three major categories. The author strongly asserts, in part 1, that the current regulatory policies are inadequate to sustain the effects of improved AI and defines the thought process to assign moral and legal responsibility to AI.
For instance, the legal system comprises of laws that punish only humans and AI-equipped machines are excluded from being held as criminals. The author strongly asserts, in part 2, the need to adopt “AI Protection Laws” to protect people from AI related crimes such as The Artificial Intelligence Development Act. The author defines specific roles major government entities such as legislatures, agencies and courts should play in enacting those laws without crossing their jurisdiction. Part 4 professes the legal framework to adopt the necessary laws into the constitution to avoid the nefarious use of AI such as the establishment of a federal agency to certify artificially intellectual machines to be safe. I intend to use the information from part 1, in the body paragraphs after identification of “Problems with AI”. The failure of current legal and governing system to accommodate the dangers of AI will be a part of this body paragraph as it will stress the need to regulate AI that won’t stand regulated if we continue with the same legal framework.
The information from the 2nd part will be used in composing yet another body paragraph suggesting the emergence of regulations against AI which will appear right after the body paragraph addressing “current incompetent towards AI” system. Part 3 will be used in the body paragraphs that offer a solution to rectify the problems and regulate AI. The author challenges the notion that adopting governmental regulations to control AI systems will hamper innovation and creativity. The author proves his argument by stating three crucial methods to regulate AI without affecting innovation within the field. Firstly, the author claims that a self-evaluation of data is essential to protect privacy laws of individuals. He asserts that deserting AI systems from data will desert the AI systems from innovation which can be harmful.
Therefore, he claims that understanding the properties, constraints and security needs of data before feeding it to the machine will produce effective results and put the right data in the hands of the right people. Secondly, the author claims that masking the data before being accessed by engineers will protect user data and abide by the security policies of the government. Data masking is a process of maintaining the confidentiality of personal data by changing names, addresses, etc of the data but keeping the information necessary to run test cycles consistent with the original input. Thirdly, the author declares that the security regulations will empower the designers of AI systems to create more intelligent machines as the core problem of violation of fundamental rights would be taken care of. For instance, Apple has adopted the differential privacy system, which understands the preferences of the user community but not individual users, to help its engineers innovate without boundaries.
Thus, the author strongly establishes the fact that AI with innovation and regulations can coexist. I intend to use the information in the concluding paragraphs of my research project. The remaining project deals with the problems and ways to regulate, but the underlying challenge of whether regulating AI be possible without obstructing innovation will be adequately answered by the information in the article. Thus, the research project will end on a stronger note addressing all the benefits of regulating AI without hampering the creative element within the area.
