Open AI to show its work

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Supporter
Looking at the general direction of the thread, I would add this-
@trappedslider (and any one else)

To the extent you want to have a discussion of any particular and specific topic involving AI that does not immediately become a generalized topic about the overall ethical issues involving AI, I would recommend creating the topic as a plus (+) thread.

I think that people have a lot of things that they want to say about AI, and robust discourse is a good thing, but based on what I have seen to date- absent a very specific mandate in the OP, I think we have seen that any AI topic will usually and immediately become a discussion about AI in general.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Tobacco companies also make food.

The problem there isn't the tobacco.

Companies are companies. What the company started with (tobacco, oil, pharmaceuticals, information technology) isn't the relevant bit.

Though kudos to your spirit, don't let me disparage your faith in humanity.

Every useful tool, when new, brings about change. And those changes generally mean trouble for someone.
 



Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Supporter
The problem there isn't the tobacco.

Companies are companies. What the company started with (tobacco, oil, pharmaceuticals, information technology) isn't the relevant bit.

My favorite professor in law school taught several courses in corporate law and business organizations. He also was the one to introduce me to Law & Economics.

When teaching corporate law, he made a point to teach the legal principles, and then to repeatedly challenge the class using various ethical issues and how they would apply those legal principles to the ethical issues.

For example-
Imagine a corporation does delivery in a city. They know that they can make more money, faster, if the drivers double park. However, there is a civil fine for double parking. After crunching the numbers, the corporation finds that they still make a lot more profit by double parking (when parking isn't available). Does the corporation instruct the drivers to double park?

...and from there, you can immediately see the variations on the issue. Does the corporation violate a civil prohibition against dumping refuse in a river if it is cost effective to do so?

Does the corporation allow a product to be sold that might injure people, if the amount of damages in tort would be far less than the profits (call this the unexamined Pinto principle). While you might think this is a slam dunk based on the Pinto, this is actually a decision that corporations make all the time, since most products carry some danger.

And so on.

I think that the problem is particularly acute when you have an inherently dangerous product ... especially because it is addictive. Corporations exist to maximize return to shareholders, so by definition, they should be trying to get as many people using their product as early as possible. Right? But ... also seriously wrong.

We can see this with tobacco because it's in the past. But now apply this to, oh, have you watched sports in the US recently? What do you think the companies that make money from gamblers are doing?

Corporations gonna corporate.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
When teaching corporate law, he made a point to teach the legal principles, and then to repeatedly challenge the class using various ethical issues and how they would apply those legal principles to the ethical issues.

Fines are merely a cost of doing business.

Or, to quote Final Fantasy - "If the penalty for a crime is a fine, that law only exists for the lower classes."
 

Remove ads

Top