AI & Society最新文献

With the desired outcome of social good within the wider robotics ecosystem, trust is identified as the central adhesive of the human–robot interaction (HRI) interface. However, building trust between humans and robots involves more than improving the machine’s technical reliability or trustworthiness in function. This paper presents a holistic, community-based approach to trust-building, where trust is understood as a multifaceted and multi-staged looped relation that depends heavily on context and human perceptions. Building on past literature that identifies dispositional and learned stages of trust, our proposed decision to trust model considers more extensively the human and situational factors influencing how trust manifests within social relations. Priority is given to the human user of technology—the initiator of human—robot trust relations—at all stages of decision-making. The envisioned formation of optimal conditions in which trust emerges requires the collective participation of practitioners, policymakers, and members of the community. With trust facilitating the smooth transition of robots into more socially embedded roles, positive receptivity of the best engineering project arises from the presence of harmonious robot-human trust relations in community spaces.

Using anthropological theory, this paper examines human–android interactions (HAI) as an emerging aspect of android science. These interactions are described in terms of adaptive learning (which is largely subconscious). This article is based on the observations reported and supplementary data from two studies that took place in Japan with a teleoperated android robot called Telenoid in the socialization of school children and older adults. We argue that interacting with androids brings about a special context, an interval, and a space/time for reflection and imagination that was not there before. During the interaction something happens. There is adaptive learning and as a result, both children and older adults accepted Telenoid, and the children and older adults accepted each other. Using frames of play and ritual, we make sense and ‘capture’ moments of adaptive learning, and the feedback that elicits a social response from all study participants that results in self-efficacy and socialization. While “ritual” refers to the application of what has been learned and “play” means that there are no obvious consequences of what has been learned. This analysis illuminates new understanding about the uncanny valley, cultural robotics and the therapeutic potential of HAI. This has implications for the acceptance of androids in ‘socialized roles’ and gives us insight into the subconscious adaptive learning processes that must take place within humans to accept androids into our society. This approach aims to provides a clearer conceptual basis and vocabulary for further research of android and humanoid development.

Large language models such as ChatGPT enable users to automatically produce text but also raise ethical concerns, for example about authorship and deception. This paper analyses and discusses some key philosophical assumptions in these debates, in particular assumptions about authorship and language and—our focus—the use of the appearance/reality distinction. We show that there are alternative views of what goes on with ChatGPT that do not rely on this distinction. For this purpose, we deploy the two phased approach of deconstruction and relate our finds to questions regarding authorship and language in the humanities. We also identify and respond to two common counter-objections in order to show the ethical appeal and practical use of our proposal.

This paper makes the case for a sharper terminology regarding AIs cognitive abilities. In arguing that thinking requires more than content production, I offer a definition of meaning drawing on a clear distinction between living and machine intelligence. A pivotal argument is the re-use of the Turing Test (TT) for understanding which theories of meaning and consciousness are no longer plausible—because they have been reproduced by software without thereby gaining conscious experience. In following the few theories that have not (yet) failed this reversed Turing Test (RTT), the focus turns towards rethinking the human condition in times of AI along the lines of three questions: What if a machine developed consciousness? What if AI proceeded without developing a consciousness? What, if machinic and human intelligence merged? These three questions in the end lead to examining three related possible futures of humanism as now determined by the relation between Human Intelligence and AI.