I'm sure the authors are right when they say (17 page PDF) "Only a small percentage of publications in prestigious AI Ethics conferences and journals discuss the ethical issues raised by AI in non-Western countries, and even fewer of those appropriately address such circumstances." I mean, in what domain has this ever been false? But I'm not sure I'll accept the word of four Cambridge scholars that "AI Ethics as a global scientific enterprise is co-producing a new techno-political order." Sure, the people involved in producing "prestigious" publications think they're the ones defining the new order, but I have the feeling they're not. The authors "argue that the global AI Ethics project fails to fulfil its promise to be universally useful by keeping global majority populations in the southern regions marginalised as 'others'." Nobody asked "the global AI Ethics project" to do this, and nobody put them in charge. They just assume (as always) that they are.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
