Month: November 2019

I think artificial intelligence should be feared and embraced. It can make our lives easier and make chores more convenient but we should be cautious about using it because of how powerful it can be. Things like AlphaGo and Watson are demonstrations of the potential power artificial intelligence can have. While they are fun to see and fascinating, they are also scary in the way they are very similar to humans. Since artificial intelligence cannot allow a computer to experience emotions the same way humans do, one robot sci-fi movie will show you how this can manifest horribly in the future. While I have these fears for how artificial intelligence technology can be used in the wrong hands, I also love the results of automation I’ve seen in my life. I frequent Panera, and I love the iPad kiosks where I can order for myself since I know how they function and can do it more easily than telling a cashier all of my customizations. I also appreciate having the ability to get anything delivered to me through Amazon in two days. I definitely recognize the negative side effects of these convenient additions to my life, the loss of jobs of many middle class workers, but I’m not sure how to solve this since everyone want their lives to be easier and more convenient. I appreciate these conveniences but also appreciate interacting with human cashiers at other restaurants and touching and shopping for things at stores instead of ordering online. We have gotten used to these perks in our lives but do not rely on most of them and can easily live without them. I think companies should think through how new technology in AI will impact the greater society and economy.

I hope our world does not become fully automated where robots are making our burgers and everything else we eat and you order everything through the internet. I don’t think the benefits are worth harm and cost it would have on our economy. I don’t think it is worth the money saving benefits to have driverless trucks because it would replace the most common job in the United States. Automations and improvements in artificial intelligence like this do not seem worth the spikes in unemployment. Where are these workers supposed to go? Will every blue collar and repetitive job become automated? Will my college education even be enough? If our field is really oversaturated with workers from around the world, how can I differentiate myself from them and these machines? I don’t think automation is a solution to every small task we have to do. Will we all become too lazy to do anything for ourselves and need a machine to do it all for us? Was Wall-E right? I personally could not work in robotics, which I consider the field of replacing workers. They may be only helping workers do their jobs now but what is the next generation of their robot assistants going to look like? Probably exactly like the workers.

I think the internet is a public service so fair access should be a right of people with the means to have access. I think that private companies should still have the right to control what content they want to be limited, restricted, or regulated. I think it would be best to only allow companies that charge a fee for their services to set regulations. So, a website you pay a subscription to could control the content that they allow on their website and could control what they allow users to do. However, Google, for example, wouldn’t be able to control what certain people do or see on their platforms since they offer all free services. Things like search engines are necessary and fundamental to the internet and should be unlimited for all users. I believe this means these private companies that users sign up for and pay to use can limit the uses of their services. While some might think this limits free speech, if users are choosing to use these services and don’t agree with limitations set on them, they can choose other platforms or services. If essential aspects of the internet are still equally available and unlimited to all users, then this should not actually limit free speech. 

I do think censorship online should be limited and avoided when it can but I believe that companies that are nonessential to the functionality of the internet should have the right to censor users. It is important to have all perspectives and opinions available so that people are aware of other peoples’ perspectives and opinions, especially those not like their own. I do think it is fine for these smaller platforms to try to prevent things like terrorism or hate on their sites. I also think it is acceptable for companies to remove what they want whether it’s negative opinions of the government, terrorism, hate, or oposing opinions. I think it makes sense and is fair for companies to not promote competition. It is expected that a company would promote themselves on their platform and promote their other products over those of their competition. Why would Donald Trump promote democratic ideas or beliefs on his own website? 

To help solve problems of hate or terror on the internet, the government could put in place overarching regulations across the internet. As the most objective actor in this situation (compared to private companies with their own agendas) the government setting regulations would allow for consistency in rules on the internet. However, I think instead companies can protect their users from things they believe are wrong and want to prevent by either removing it completely or warning users. If there were warnings to protect or warn users of fake news or hateful information, this could help prevent a need for online censorship. I am concerned about online censorship and not having access to all information and becoming unaware of other viewpoints or things to be worried about but I also don’t think the internet is the only outlet for free speech.

I think corporations cannot be thought of as exactly “people”. While they are given many of the same rights as individual persons and are considered people under the law, they cannot be held to the same standards as humans since they don’t have exactly the same rights. People should act morally and ethically but are not forced to unless they do something that breaks the law. Corporations should be expected to act similarly but do not have as many laws and regulations on what they do. Corporations should be held to the same high moral and ethical standards as people but ultimately are allowed to act unethically if they choose to. It is up to a corporation to maintain its reputation and they should be allowed to do business with whomever they want, create products they want, or act immorally as long as it follows laws and regulations they fall under. Of course I do not hope corporations will act unethically but it is up to consumers to decide which companies to do business with and hopefully unethical behavior or partnerships won’t be tolerated. I do think businesses should refrain from doing business with immoral or unethical organizations or persons but if there are not regulations/laws to prevent this I think they should be allowed to. It is up to the leadership in a company, or the person/people who decide which companies and people the company works with, to decide what is moral and ethical for that company and what their threshold is for these partnerships.

I believe the government is responsible for keeping an even playing field for companies. It is dangerous when a company becomes too powerful, whether through being big or not. Monopolies are dangerous since they prevent any competition and can set prices however they want. I think they should stay illegal since they give one corporation too much power and control over the market and since there aren’t as many regulations and laws forcing companies to act morally, this can become very dangerous. This is becoming more and more difficult since tech giants are growing so quickly that the government cannot understand and keep up with the changes. These tech giants are innovating so much that it is hard for everyone to understand everything they’re doing and therefore harder to regulate these things. It could be beneficial to break them up or find other ways to regulate. Companies should be more heavily regulated to prevent these dangerous giants/monopolies. Business decisions can often lead to making immoral or unethical decisions in order to make a profit. This is why it is dangerous to give so much freedom to companies to make these decisions about morality. There are some laws that decide if what a corporation does is right, but I believe there should be even more in order to protect consumers. It is necessary to ensure fair competition between companies and it is up to the government to do this since companies are focused on making money, not helping or promoting anyone else.