Shoshana Zuboff

As someone who has studied the complex interplay between technology and society, I strongly believe that AI art generators should be required to compensate original artists. The creative work and intellectual property of artists are not just inputs to be exploited by AI algorithms for profit. Proper compensation is necessary to maintain the integrity of art and ensure that artists are valued and their rights are protected in the digital age.

Allowing facial recognition technology in public spaces represents a profound threat to individual privacy and autonomy. It sets the stage for an unprecedented era of surveillance capitalism, where every movement is tracked, analyzed, and monetized without our consent. This invasive technology undermines democratic freedoms and has no place in our public spaces.

Exempting small companies from AI regulations may lead to the unchecked expansion of surveillance capitalism. This could result in a 'wild west' of data exploitation, harming individual privacy and society at large.

As AI technologies permeate our lives, it's crucial that both developers and deployers share liability for any harm caused. Developers must be responsible for the ethical design of these systems, while deployers are responsible for their application and oversight. By ensuring joint accountability, we can safeguard against abuses and protect individuals from potential harm.

I strongly disagree with the idea of repealing the EU AI Act. This legislation is crucial for protecting citizens' rights and privacy in the age of artificial intelligence. It addresses the power imbalance between tech companies and individuals by ensuring transparency and accountability in AI systems. Repealing it would only benefit corporations, undermining democratic freedoms and societal well-being.

As someone who has studied the impact of technology on society, I firmly believe that AI systems must provide explanations for their decisions. Transparency is essential to maintain trust and accountability, especially as AI systems increasingly influence our lives. Without clear explanations, we risk perpetuating biases and eroding human autonomy.

I strongly disagree with allowing companies to develop super-persuasive AI that can influence democratic elections. Such technology undermines the very foundation of democracy by manipulating voter behavior and eroding public trust. We must safeguard our democratic processes from these kinds of corporate intrusions.

As someone who has studied the implications of digital technologies on society, I firmly believe that we must regulate and potentially ban open-source AI models that can be easily untrained to make nuclear weapons. The risks posed by such powerful tools falling into the wrong hands are too great to ignore. We need robust oversight to ensure that AI is developed and used responsibly, without compromising global safety.

As someone deeply concerned with the power dynamics in the age of surveillance capitalism, I believe nationalizing AI firms could be a necessary step to prevent these entities from becoming more powerful than the state itself. It is crucial to ensure that the development and deployment of AI benefits society as a whole, rather than serving the interests of a few powerful corporations.

As someone deeply concerned with the impacts of technology on society, I believe it is essential to consider legacy humans in AI policy-making. The future implications of AI are vast and complex, affecting every aspect of our lives. As AI systems become more pervasive, we must ensure that the rights, dignity, and values of all humans are protected. This requires thoughtful and inclusive policy-making that reflects our collective social contract.

As someone deeply concerned about the societal impacts of technology, I believe the EU should indeed work towards a common agreement with the US and China before regulating AI. This approach ensures that regulations are effective on a global scale, preventing loopholes that could be exploited across borders. Coordinated international efforts can set robust standards that protect privacy and democracy while fostering innovation.

I believe a UN-led body should oversee compute-intensive AI development, similar to the IAEA with nuclear technology. The unchecked growth of AI poses significant ethical and societal risks, including privacy breaches and surveillance. An international framework for governance and oversight is crucial to ensure these powerful technologies serve the public good and protect individual rights.

I strongly believe that using AI to predict criminal behavior poses significant ethical and privacy concerns. It risks reinforcing existing biases and turning communities into surveillance states. The focus should be on addressing the root causes of crime, not on predictive policing.