The rapid proliferation of parochial AI systems
There was a comment by Casey Newton in the latest Hardfork podcast, which struck a chord with me.
He stated the future of these AI tools and chatbots is likely to be more personalised. With more personalised preferences and principles, they will become much more helpful to individuals.
If you believe that these AIs are going to become tutors and teachers to our students of the future in at least some ways, different states have different curricula, right? And there will be some chatbots that believe in evolution, and there will be some that absolutely do not. And it’ll be interesting to see whether students wind up using VPNs just to get a chatbot that’ll tell them the truth about the history of some awful part of our country’s history.
This raises a pressing concern: how do we prevent personalised chatbots and learning models from becoming closed-off filter bubbles, entrenching bias and preferred narratives?
The prospect of students struggling to break out of localised “truth bubbles” imposed by AI infrastructure is a serious provocation.
Maybe this is the same problem as personalised news algorithms in a different form, and it is worth repeating these AI systems are not neutral or benign.
It will take investment in AI, digital, data, and media literacy to ask questions about the models we use. Not to sit back and enjoy the utility while our discernment slowly erodes.
When we zoom out and put this dynamic into the context of the global regulatory space, we see national and regional lines being drawn and the rapid proliferation of parochial AI systems.
Students will experience many AI models throughout their lives, each with a signature, limitations, and inbuilt bias and preferences. Whether deliberate or unintended.
Just imagine this scenario momentarily and reflect on what it will take for your education system to mobilise to embrace this challenge.
.: This is part of my weekly Promptcraft newsletter. You can subscribe here.