The revolution of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, and its implications for human–robot interaction (HRI) opened up the debate on crucial regulatory, business, societal, and ethical considerations. This paper explores essential issues from the anthropomorphic perspective, examining the complex interplay between humans and AI models in societal and corporate contexts. We provided a comprehensive review of existing literature on HRI, with a special emphasis on the impact of generative models such as ChatGPT. The scientometric study posits that (...) due to their advanced linguistic capabilities and ability to mimic human-like behavior, generative AIs like ChatGPT will continue to grow in popularity in pair with human rational empathy, tendency for personification and their advanced linguistic capabilities and ability to mimic human-like behavior. As they blur the boundaries between humans and robots, these models introduce fresh moral and philosophical dilemmas. Our research aims to extrapolate key trends and unique factors in HRI and to elucidate the technical aspects of generative AI that enhance its effectiveness in this field compared to traditional rule-based AI systems. We further discuss the challenges and limitations of applying generative AI in HRI, providing a future research agenda for AI optimization in diverse applications, including education, entertainment, and healthcare. (shrink)

The proliferation of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI) has led to an increased reliance on AI‐generated content for designing and deploying digital health interventions. While generative AI has the potential to facilitate and automate healthcare, there are concerns that AI‐generated content and AI‐generated health advice could trigger, perpetuate, or exacerbate prior traumatic experiences among vulnerable populations. In this discussion article, I examined how generative‐AI‐powered digital health interventions could trigger, perpetuate, or exacerbate emotional trauma among vulnerable (...) populations who rely on digital health interventions as complementary or alternative sources of seeking health services or information. I then proposed actionable strategies for mitigating AI‐generated trauma in the context of digital health interventions. The arguments raised in this article are expected to shift the focus of AI practitioners against prioritizing dominant narratives in AI algorithms into seriously considering the needs of vulnerable minority groups who are at the greatest risk for trauma but are often invisible in AI data sets, AI algorithms, and their resultant technologies. (shrink)

This paper examines the impact and implications of ChatGPT and other generative AI technologies within the African context while looking at the ethical benefits and concerns that are particularly pertinent to the continent. Through a robust analysis of ChatGPT and other generative AI systems using established approaches for analysing the ethics of emerging technologies, this paper provides unique ethical benefits and concerns for these systems in the African context. This analysis combined approaches such as anticipatory technology ethics (ATE), (...) ethical impact assessment (EIA), and ethical issues of emerging ICT applications with AI (ETICA) with specific issues from the literature. The findings show that ChatGPT and other generative AI systems raise unique ethical concerns such as bias, intergenerational justice, exploitation of labour and cultural diversity in Africa but also have significant ethical benefits. These ethical concerns and benefits are considered crucial in shaping the design and deployment of ChatGPT and similar technologies responsibly. It further explores the potential applications of ChatGPT in critical domain areas such as education, agriculture, and healthcare, thereby demonstrating the transformative possibilities that these technologies can have on Africa. This paper underscores the critical role of AI governance as Africa increasingly adopts ChatGPT and similar AI systems. It argues that a comprehensive understanding of AI governance is essential not only for maximising the benefits of generative AI systems but also for facilitating a global dialogue. This dialogue aims to foster shared knowledge and insights between the Global North and the Global South, which is important for the development and creation of inclusive and equitable AI policies and practices that can be beneficial for all regions. (shrink)

Generative AI technologies have the potential to be socially and politically transformative. In this paper, we focus on exploring the potential impacts that Generative AI could have on the functioning of our democracies and the nature of citizenship. We do so by drawing on accounts of deliberative democracy and the deliberative virtues associated with it, as well as the reciprocal impacts that social media and Generative AI will have on each other and the broader information landscape. Drawing (...) on this background theory, we outline some of the key positive and negative impacts that Generative AI is likely to have on democratic citizenship. The political significance of these impacts suggests the need for further regulation. (shrink)

There is a history of thinking that photographs provide a special kind of access to the objects depicted in them, beyond the access that would be provided by a painting or drawing. What is included in the photograph does not depend on the photographer’s beliefs about what is in front of the camera. This feature leads Kendall Walton to argue that photographs literally allow us to see the objects which appear in them. Current generative algorithms produce images in response (...) to users’ text prompts. Depending on the parameters, the output can resemble specific people or things which are named in the prompt. This resemblance does not depend on the user’s beliefs, so generated images are in this sense like photographs. Given this parallel, how should we think about AI-generated images? (shrink)

The new wave of ‘foundation models’—general-purpose generative AI models, for production of text (e.g., ChatGPT) or images (e.g., MidJourney)—represent a dramatic advance in the state of the art for AI. But their use also introduces a range of new risks, which has prompted an ongoing conversation about possible regulatory mechanisms. Here we propose a specific principle that should be incorporated into legislation: that any organization developing a foundation model intended for public use must demonstrate a reliable detection mechanism for (...) the content it generates, as a condition of its public release. The detection mechanism should be made publicly available in a tool that allows users to query, for an arbitrary item of content, whether the item was generated (wholly or partly) by the model. In this paper, we argue that this requirement is technically feasible and would play an important role in reducing certain risks from new AI models in many domains. We also outline a number of options for the tool’s design, and summarize a number of points where further input from policymakers and researchers would be required. (shrink)

Generative AI appears to threaten argument creativity. Because of its capacity to generate coherent texts, individuals are likely to integrate its ideas, and not their own, into arguments, thereby reducing their creative contribution. This article argues that this view is mistaken—it rests on a misunderstanding of the nature of creativity. Within arguments, creative and critical thinking cannot be separated. Because creativity is enmeshed with skills such as analysis and evaluation, the use of generative AI in the construction of (...) arguments, especially in the role as universal audience, has the potential to heighten, not diminish argument creativity. (shrink)

Since their public launch, a little over a year ago, large language models (LLMs) have inspired a flurry of analysis about what their implications might be for medical ethics, and for society more broadly. 1 Much of the recent debate has moved beyond categorical evaluations of the permissibility or impermissibility of LLM use in different general contexts (eg, at work or school), to more fine-grained discussions of the criteria that should govern their appropriate use in specific domains or towards certain (...) ends. 2 With each passing week, it seems more and more inevitable that LLMs will be a pervasive feature of many, if not most, of our lives. It would not be possible—and would not be desirable—to prohibit them across the board. We need to learn how to live with LLMs; to identify and mitigate the risks they pose to us, to our fellow creatures, and the... (shrink)

Cohen’s (2023) mapping exercise of possible bioethical issues emerging from the use of ChatGPT in medicine provides an informative, useful, and thought-provoking trigger for discussions of AI ethic...

Despite the many successes of generative AI, a number of fundamental questions have begun to arise around this technology. There is undoubtedly an interesting situation from a philosophical point of view. It can be carefully assumed that contemporary digital information processing technologies have arisen inside a circle of civilisation, one of the foundations of which is the classical account of truth. This account, even if seen as ideal and absolute, nevertheless seems to be a driving force in the field (...) of science. Is it possible that generative AI will result in the replacement of the pursuit of truth by a mere uncritical adherence to the results provided by AI systems, as well as the inhibition of lively creativity both scientific and artistic? (shrink)

This article examines the potential parallels between children's widespread adoption of smartphones and the emerging reliance on generative AI tools in childhood education. Drawing on Jonathan Haidt’s insights into how phone-based childhoods can disrupt the development of critical executive functions, and Shannon Vallor’s concept of “moral deskilling,” the discussion raises concerns about “intellectual deskilling” in younger generations. As generative AI tools like ChatGPT gain popularity, children risk becoming overly reliant on automated solutions, potentially undermining metacognition and critical thinking. (...) This paper highlights risks such as cognitive offloading, instant gratification, and diminished perseverance and proposes measures to ensure generative AI supports rather than replaces essential developmental experiences. (shrink)

With the increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) and other digital technologies in healthcare, the ethical debate surrounding their adoption is becoming more prominent. Here I consider the issue of gaining informed patient consent to AI-enhanced care from the vantage point of the United Kingdom’s National Health Service setting. I build my discussion around two claims from the World Health Organization: that healthcare services should not be denied to individuals who refuse AI-enhanced care and that there is no (...) precedence to seeking patient consent to AI-enhanced care. I discus U.K. law relating to patient consent and the General Data Protection Regulation to show that current standards relating to patient consent are adequate for AI-enhanced care. I then suggest that in the future it may not be possible to guarantee patient access to non-AI-enhanced healthcare, in a similar way to how we do not offer patients manual alternatives to automated healthcare processes. Throughout my discussion I focus on the issues of patient choice and veracity in the patient–clinician relationship. Finally, I suggest that the best way to protect patients from potential harms associated with the introduction of AI to patient care is not via an overly burdensome patient consent process but via evaluation and regulation of AI technologies. (shrink)

Artificial intelligence (AI) and its introduction into clinical pathways presents an array of ethical issues that are being discussed in the JME. 1–7 The development of AI technologies that can produce text that will pass plagiarism detectors 8 and are capable of appearing to be written by a human author 9 present new issues for medical ethics. One set of worries concerns authorship and whether it will now be possible to know that an author or student in fact produced submitted (...) work. That seems likely to be a general worry for secondary and higher education, as well as for all academic journals. Thus far generative AI chatbots do not seem to be able to produce a fully referenced and well-argued ethics article, but they probably could generate a blog or student essay that would... (shrink)

This book explores the revolutionary intersection of Generative AI (GenAI) and cybersecurity. It presents a comprehensive guide that intertwines theories and practices, aiming to equip cybersecurity professionals, CISOs, AI researchers, developers, architects and college students with an understanding of GenAI’s profound impacts on cybersecurity. The scope of the book ranges from the foundations of GenAI, including underlying principles, advanced architectures, and cutting-edge research, to specific aspects of GenAI security such as data security, model security, application-level security, and the emerging (...) fields of LLMOps and DevSecOps. It explores AI regulations around the globe, ethical considerations, the threat landscape, and privacy preservation. Further, it assesses the transformative potential of GenAI in reshaping the cybersecurity landscape, the ethical implications of using advanced models, and the innovative strategies required to secure GenAI applications. Lastly, the book presents an in-depth analysis of the security challenges and potential solutions specific to GenAI, and a forward-looking view of how it can redefine cybersecurity practices. By addressing these topics, it provides answers to questions on how to secure GenAI applications, as well as vital support with understanding and navigating the complex and ever-evolving regulatory environments, and how to build a resilient GenAI security program. The book offers actionable insights and hands-on resources for anyone engaged in the rapidly evolving world of GenAI and cybersecurity. (shrink)

In this paper, we argue that Midjourney—a generative AI program that transforms text prompts into images—should be understood not as an agent or a tool, but as a new type of artistic medium. We first examine the view of Midjourney as an agent, considering whether it could be seen as an artist or co-author. This perspective proves unsatisfactory, as Midjourney lacks intentionality and mental states. We then explore the notion of Midjourney as a tool, highlighting its unpredictability and the (...) limited fine-grained control users have over its outputs, which sets it apart from traditional artistic tools. We propose that creating images with Midjourney parallels a gardener's interaction with natura naturans—nature's autonomous generative processes. Similarly, Midjourney acts as machina naturans, where users engage with its dynamic recalcitrance to influence, but not fully control, the creative process. This approach presents Midjourney as an artistic medium shaped by its inherent unpredictability. (shrink)

The Bubonic Plague outbreak that wormed its way through San Francisco’s Chinatown in 1900 tells a story of prejudice guiding health policy, resulting in enormous suffering for much of its Chinese population. This article seeks to discuss the potential for hidden “prejudice” should Artificial Intelligence (AI) gain a dominant foothold in healthcare systems. Using a toy model, this piece explores potential future outcomes, should AI continue to develop without bound. Where potential dangers may lurk will be discussed, so that (...) the full benefits AI has to offer can be reaped whilst avoiding the pitfalls. The model is produced using the computer programming language MATLAB and offers visual representations of potential outcomes. Interwoven with these potential outcomes are numerous historical models for problems caused by prejudice and recent issues in AI systems, from police prediction and facial recognition software to recruitment tools. Therefore, this research’s novel angle, of using historical precedents to model and discuss potential futures, offers a unique contribution. (shrink)

The advent of generative artificial intelligence and the widespread adoption of it in society engendered intensive debates about its ethical implications and risks. These risks often differ from those associated with traditional discriminative machine learning. To synthesize the recent discourse and map its normative concepts, we conducted a scoping review on the ethics of generative artificial intelligence, including especially large language models and text-to-image models. Our analysis provides a taxonomy of 378 normative issues in 19 topic areas and (...) ranks them according to their prevalence in the literature. The study offers a comprehensive overview for scholars, practitioners, or policymakers, condensing the ethical debates surrounding fairness, safety, harmful content, hallucinations, privacy, interaction risks, security, alignment, societal impacts, and others. We discuss the results, evaluate imbalances in the literature, and explore unsubstantiated risk scenarios. (shrink)

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming healthcare systems by improving operational efficiency, simplifying patient care procedures, and improving diagnostic accuracy. Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, like machine learning and natural language processing, present previously unheard-of chances to quickly and accurately evaluate enormous volumes of healthcare data, assisting with clinical decision-making and enhancing patient outcomes. Aim thorough examination and analysis of artificial intelligence's impact on healthcare leadership, with a particular emphasis on present nursing trends and their implications for the (...) future. The study tries to uncover the advantages, difficulties, and consequences of AI integration by looking at how AI technologies including clinical decision support systems, predictive analytics, robots, natural language processing, and telehealth are being used in nursing practice. Method: A comprehensive analysis including research articles published between 2015 and 2024 was carried out. To give a thorough overview of AI's present and future uses in healthcare, major themes and trends were found and summarized. Results: By stressing AI's role in improving diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes, the study highlights the technology's major contributions to drug discovery, virtual patient care, and medical imaging. Human-centered design concerns, the necessity of educational changes, and ethical challenges surrounding the application of AI surfaced as crucial topics needing attention. Conclusion: AI has enormous potential to transform healthcare by enhancing operational effectiveness, optimizing the delivery of care, and increasing diagnostic precision. Still, ethical issues must be resolved, interdisciplinary cooperation must be promoted, and educational frameworks must be improved in order to provide healthcare workers with the necessary AI skills. (shrink)

Questions surrounding engagement with generative AI are often framed in terms of trust, yet mere theorizing about trust may not yield actionable insights, given the multifaceted nature of trust. Literature on trust typically overlooks how individuals make meaning in their interactions with other entities, including AI. This paper reexamines trust with insights from Merleau-Ponty’s views on embodiment, positing trust as a style of world engagement characterized by openness—an attitude wherein individuals enact and give themselves to their lived world, prepared (...) to reorganize their existence. This paper argues that generative AI mediates users’ existence by attuning their openness. Since users perceive generative AI not merely as a tool but as possessing human-like existence, their engagement with AI serves as a rehearsal for articulating and reorganizing their engagement with the world. Consequently, users neither trust nor distrust generative AI; rather, it mediates their trust. This perspective suggests that users’ moral stance towards generative AI involves both other-regarding ethics and information environment ethics. Drawing insights from Kant’s deontology, it proposes that respecting AI’s integrity is equivalent to preserving both our humanity and the integrity of the information environment. -/- . (shrink)

Early artificial intelligence research was dominated by intellectualist assumptions, producing explicit representation of facts and rules in “good old-fashioned AI”. After this approach foundered, emphasis shifted to deep learning in neural networks, leading to the creation of Large Language Models which have shown remarkable capacity to automatically generate intelligible texts. This new phase of AI is already producing profound social consequences which invite philosophical reflection. This paper argues that Charles Peirce’s philosophy throws valuable light on genAI’s capabilities first with regard (...) to meaning, then knowledge and truth. Firstly, I explore how Peirce’s icon/index/symbol distinction illuminates the functioning of genAI. I argue that genAI’s engineers have skilfully captured a form of symbolicity, but no other sign-kind. In lacking indexical signs, LLMs lack connection with, and accountability to, particular worldly objects. In lacking iconic signs, LLMs are insufficiently disciplined by structural – most notably logical – relationships. Then I argue that GenAI’s astounding stream of articulate, truth-semblant, yet worthless texts issues a timely reckoning to modern philosophy’s representational realism. By contrast, Peirce’s pragmatism scaffolds a rich relational realism (Gili and Maddalena 2022), which shows how meaningful concepts, and a grasp of truth, can only occur across multiple cognitive systems who are simultaneously richly related with one another, and a shared environment in which they continually act and receive feedback, within a logical space of reasons. As Peirce himself noted, “Mere knowledge, though it be systematized, may be a dead memory; while by science we all habitually mean a living and growing body of truth”. (shrink)

A leading critic of the disruptive force of technology in education, Bernard Stiegler saw the counter-effects of artificial intelligence in undermining human agency, autonomy and individuality, rendering the role of education ever more critical. Stiegler believes that our goal is not to abandon technology but to focus our attention on its power and direction in a hypercapitalist economy. While he did not foresee the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GAI), its rapid acceleration raises important issues for his notion of (...) digital writing as a pharmakon. In this essay, we examine Stiegler’s view on intelligence, digital writing, technological memory, and neuropower, focusing specifically on his Shanghai lecture and Nanjing Lectures. We compare Stiegler with Catherine Malabou, who examines the nature of intelligence primarily through the lens of neuroscience. We argue that Malabou’s view of neuroplasticity in human and artificial brains, and her critique of techno-narcissism in the control over technology, add an important dimension to Stiegler’s political critique of education. Finally, we examine how best to construe AI as part of a hyper-materialist epistemology that Stiegler espouses in the conclusion of his Nanjing Lectures, to bring about neganthropic knowledge through a therapeutics of care. (shrink)

“Throw away anything that sounds too complicated. Only keep what is simple to grasp...If the information appears fuzzy and causes the brain to implode after two sentences, toss it away and stop listening. Doing so will make the news as orderly and simple to understand as the truth.” - In “GHG emissions,” The Kingfisher Story Collection, (Vuong 2022a).

The recent wave of generative AI (GAI) systems like Stable Diffusion that can produce images from human prompts raises controversial issues about creatorship, originality, creativity and copyright. This paper focuses on creatorship: who creates and should be credited with the outputs made with the help of GAI? Existing views on creatorship are mixed: some insist that GAI systems are mere tools, and human prompters are creators proper; others are more open to acknowledging more significant roles for GAI, but most (...) conceive of creatorship in an all-or-nothing fashion. We develop a novel view, called CCC (collective-centered creation), that improves on these existing positions. On CCC, GAI outputs are created by collectives in the first instance. Claims to creatorship come in degrees and depend on the nature and significance of individual contributions made by the various agents and entities involved, including users, GAI systems, developers, producers of training data and others. Importantly, CCC maintains that GAI systems can sometimes be part of a co-creating collective. We detail how CCC can advance existing debates and resolve controversies around creatorship involving GAI. (shrink)

Until now, the mass spread of fake news and its negative consequences have implied mainly textual content towards a loss of citizens' trust in institutions. Recently, a new type of machine learning framework has arisen, Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) – a class of deep neural network models capable of creating multimedia content (photos, videos, audio) that simulate accurate content with extreme precision. While there are several areas of worthwhile application of GANs – e.g., in the field of audio-visual production, (...) human-computer interactions, satire, and artistic creativity – their deceptive uses, at least as currently foreseeable, are just as numerous and worrying. The main concern is linked to the so-called “deepfakes”, fake images or videos that simulate real events with extreme precision. When trained on a human face, GANs can make the face assume hyper-realistic movements, expressions and (verbal and non-verbal) communication abilities. This technology poses an urgent threat to the governance of democratic processes concerning the production of public opinions and political discourses, with significant potential for reality-altering and disinformation. After a short introduction of their current technical state-of-the-art, in this paper we want to enquire the GANs` socio-technical system alongside different and intertwined philosophical accounts. Firstly, we will argue about the conditions that make perceived a GANs-generated content as trustworthy, arguing also about the general effects GANs might have on the perceived trustworthiness of individuals. Thereafter, we will discuss about the inadequacy to approach GANs only as perception-altering technology. Against this backdrop, we will propose a theoretical turn that considers the human-machine relationships of trustworthiness as elements of a broader hybrid socio-technical systems. This turn come up with political repercussions that we will discuss in the last part of the paper. (shrink)

Participation in research is supposed to be voluntary and informed. Yet it is difficult to ensure people are adequately informed about the potential uses of their biological materials when they donate samples for future research. We propose a novel consent framework which we call “demonstrated consent” that leverages blockchain technology and generative AI to address this problem. In a demonstrated consent model, each donated sample is associated with a unique non-fungible token (NFT) on a blockchain, which records in its (...) metadata information about the planned and past uses of the sample in research, and is updated with each use of the sample. This information is accessible to a large language model (LLM) customized to present this information in an understandable and interactive manner. Thus, our model uses blockchain and generative AI technologies to track, make available, and explain information regarding planned and past uses of donated samples. (shrink)

Since 2022, Visual Generative AI (vGenAI) tools have experienced rapid adoption and garnered widespread acclaim for their ability to produce high-quality images with convincing photorealistic representations. These technologies mirror society’s prevailing visual politics in a mediated form, and actively contribute to the perpetuation of deeply ingrained assumptions, categories, values, and aesthetic representations. In this paper, we critically analyze Stable Diffusion (SD), a widely used open-source vGenAI tool, through visual and intersectional analysis. Our analysis covers; (1) the aesthetics of the (...) AI-generated visual material, (2) the institutional contexts in which these images are situated and produced, and (3) the intersections between power systems such as racism, colonialism, and capitalism—which are both reflected and perpetuated through the visual aesthetics. Our visual analysis of 180 SD-generated images deliberately sought to produce representations along different lines of privilege and disadvantage—such as wealth/poverty or citizen/immigrant—drawing from feminist science and technology studies, visual media studies, and intersectional critical theory. We demonstrate how imagery produced through SD perpetuates pre-existing power systems such as sexism, racism, heteronormativity, and ableism, and assumes a default individual as white, able-bodied, and masculine-presenting. Furthermore, we problematize the hegemonic cultural values in the imagery that can be traced to the institutional context of these tools, particularly in the tendency towards Euro- and North America-centric cultural representations. Finally, we find that the power systems around SD result in the continual reproduction of harmful and violent imagery through technology, challenging the oft-underlying notion that vGenAI is culturally and aesthetically neutral. Based on the harms identified through our qualitative, interpretative analysis, we bring forth a reparative and social justice-oriented approach to vGenAI—including the need for acknowledging and rendering visible the cultural-aesthetic politics of this technology and engaging in reparative approaches that aim to symbolically and materially mend injustices enacted against social groups. (shrink)

The increasing use of Generative AI raises many ethical, philosophical, and legal issues. A key issue here is uncertainties about how different degrees of Generative AI assistance in the production of text impacts assessments of the human authorship of that text. To explore this issue, we developed an experimental mixed methods survey study (N = 602) asking participants to reflect on a scenario of a human author receiving assistance to write a short novel as part of a 3 (...) (high, medium, or low degrees of assistance) X 2 (human or AI assistant) factorial design. We found that, for a human author, the degree of assistance they receive matters for our assessments of their level of authorship, creatorship, and responsibility, but not what or who rendered that assistance, although it was more important to disclose human rather than AI assistance. However, in our assessments of the assisting agent, human assistants were viewed as warranting higher rates of authorship, creatorship, and responsibility, compared to AI assistants rendering the same level of support. These results help us to better understand emerging norms around collaborative human-AI generated text, with implications for other types of collaborative content creation. (shrink)

The article critically analyzes how contemporary image practices involving generative artificial intelligence are entangled with processes of democratization. We demonstrate and discuss how generative artificial intelligence images raise questions of democratization and citizenship in terms of access, skills, validation, truths, and diversity. First, the article establishes a theoretical framework, which includes theory on democratization and aesthetics and lays the foundations for the analytical concepts of ‘formative’ and ‘generative’ visual citizenship. Next, we argue for the use of explorative (...) and collaborative methods to investigate contemporary image practice, before analyzing the central part of our investigation, which takes the form of four collaborative workshops conducted in 2023 with external partners in different domains (the art scene, art therapy, education, and the news media). After analyzing insights from these workshops, the article significantly nuances how visual citizenship is at work in different manners depending on the different concrete image practices using generative artificial intelligence. Finally, we conclude that an aesthetic perspective offers valuable insights into foundational aspects of belonging to contemporary visual communities. (shrink)

This participatory study, conducted in an introductory psychology class, recounts self-reflections of 22 undergraduate students and their instructor engaging in an GenAI-mediated storyboard generation process. It relies on Gordon Pask’s conversation theory, structuring out the nature of interactions between students, instructor, and GenAI, and then uses a qualitative narrative to describe these conversational feedback loops constituting the creation of draft and final storyboards. Results suggest students engaged in cyclical feedback driven processes to master their creations, used elements of photography related (...) to the relationships between objects in frame, image processing, and cultural objects/themes to generate narratives. Issues were faced with generating text on images, and the consistency and style of generated frames as they interacted with GenAI tools. This study provides guidelines to university teaching professionals to design effective activities mediated by text-to-image GenAI. (shrink)

This study investigates the perspectives of 12 journal reviewers from diverse academic disciplines on using large language models (LLMs) in the peer review process. We identified key themes regarding integrating LLMs through qualitative data analysis of verbatim responses to an open-ended questionnaire. Reviewers noted that LLMs can automate tasks such as preliminary screening, plagiarism detection, and language verification, thereby reducing workload and enhancing consistency in applying review standards. However, significant ethical concerns were raised, including potential biases, lack of transparency, and (...) risks to privacy and confidentiality. Reviewers emphasized that LLMs should not replace human judgment but rather complement it with human oversight, which is essential to ensure the relevance and accuracy of AI-generated feedback. This study underscores the need for clear guidelines and policies, as well as their proper dissemination among researchers, to address the ethical and practical challenges of using LLMs in academic publishing. (shrink)

At least since Francis Bacon, the slogan “knowledge is power” has been used to capture the relationship between decision-making at a group level and information. We know that being able to shape the informational environment for a group is a way to shape their decisions; it is essentially a way to make decisions for them. This paper focuses on strategies that are intentionally, by design, impactful on the decision-making capacities of groups, effectively shaping their ability to take advantage of information (...) in their environment. Among these, the best known are political rhetoric, propaganda, and misinformation. The phenomenon this paper brings out from these is a relatively new strategy, which we call slopaganda. According to The Guardian, News Corp Australia is currently churning out 3000 “local” generative AI (GAI) stories each week. In the coming years, such “generative AI slop” will present multiple knowledge-related (epistemic) challenges. We draw on contemporary research in cognitive science and artificial intelligence to diagnose the problem of slopaganda, describe some recent troubling cases, then suggest several interventions that may help to counter slopaganda. (shrink)

In this article, M. Beatrice Fazi takes up Media Theory’s invitation to engage with Alan Díaz Alva’s analysis of her philosophical work on contingency in computation. The central argument of Fazi’s Contingent Computation: Abstraction, Experience, and Indeterminacy in Computational Aesthetics is that computation can be productive of ontological novelty. This piece revisits that argument in the light of the technological developments that have occurred since 2018, when the book was published. Focusing on generative artificial intelligence (generative AI), the (...) article considers how the concepts of generativity, aesthetics and contingency are tackled in the book and in present-day debates about generative AI systems. (shrink)

This paper discusses some societal implications of the most recent and publicly discussed application of advanced machine learning techniques: generative AI models, such as ChatGPT (text generation) and DALL-E (text-to-image generation). The aim is to shift attention away from conceptual disputes, e.g. regarding their level of intelligence and similarities/differences with human performance, to focus instead on practical problems, pertaining the impact that these technologies might have (and already have) on human societies. After a preliminary clarification of how generative (...) AI works (Sect. 1), the paper discusses what kind of transparency ought to be required for such technologies and for the business model behind their commercial exploitation (Sect. 2), what is the role of user-generated data in determining their performance and how it should inform the redistribution of the resulting benefits (Sect. 3), the best way of integrating generative AI systems in the creative job market and how to properly negotiate their role in it (Sect. 4), and what kind of “cognitive extension” offered by these technologies we ought to embrace, and what type we should instead resist and monitor (Sect. 5). The last part of the paper summarizes the main conclusions of this analysis, also marking its distance from other, more apocalyptic approaches to the dangers of AI for human society. (shrink)

The rapid urbanization of modern cities necessitates innovative approaches to data collection and integration for smarter urban management. With the Internet of Things (IoT) at the core of these advancements, the ability to efficiently gather, analyze, and utilize data becomes paramount. Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing data collection by enabling intelligent synthesis, anomaly detection, and real-time decision-making across interconnected systems. This paper explores how generative AI enhances IoT-driven data collection in smart cities, focusing on applications in transportation, (...) energy, public safety, and environmental monitoring. By addressing challenges such as data privacy, scalability, and ethical considerations, the study highlights how generative AI transforms urban governance and paves the way for sustainable and citizen-centric development. Key trends, case studies, and future research directions are discussed, showcasing the potential of generative AI as a cornerstone of smart city initiatives. (shrink)

AGGA (Academic Guidelines for Generative AIs) is a dataset of 80 academic guidelines for the usage of generative AIs and large language models in academia, selected systematically and collected from official university websites across six continents. Comprising 181,225 words, the dataset supports natural language processing tasks such as language modeling, sentiment and semantic analysis, model synthesis, classification, and topic labeling. It can also serve as a benchmark for ambiguity detection and requirements categorization. This resource aims to facilitate research (...) on AI governance in educational contexts, promoting a deeper understanding of the integration of AI technologies in academia. (shrink)

The recent emergence of generative AI software as viable tools for use in the cultural and creative industries has sparked debates about the potential for “creativity” to be automated and “augmented” by algorithmic machines. Such discussions, however, begin from an ontological position, attempting to define creativity by either falling prey to universalism (i.e. “creativity is X”) or reductionism (i.e. “only humans can be truly creative” or “human creativity will be fully replaced by creative machines”). Furthermore, such an approach evades (...) addressing the real and material impacts of AI on creative labour in these industries. This article thus offers more expansive methodological and conceptual approaches to the recent hype on generative AI. By combining (Csikszentmihalyi, The systems model of creativity, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014) systems view of creativity, in which we emphasise the shift from “what” to “where” is creativity, with (Lievrouw, Media technologies, The MIT Press, 2014) relational-materialist theory of “mediation”, we argue that the study of “creativity” in the context of generative AI must be attentive to the interactions between technologies, practices, and social arrangements. When exploring the relational space between these elements, three core concepts become pertinent: creative labour, automation, and distributed agency. Critiquing “creativity” through these conceptual lenses allows us to re-situate the use of generative AI within discourses of labour in post-industrial capitalism and brings us to a conceptualisation of creativity that privileges neither the human user nor machine algorithm but instead emphasises a relational and distributed form of agency. (shrink)

Abstract This article delves into the intricate interplay between copyright laws, Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies, and the evolving role of authors in the contemporary digital landscape, especially after the irruption of Generative AI systems, as ChatGPT. The paper scrutinizes Japan’s approach to copyright in the realm of AI training, highlighting the delicate balance between safeguarding creators’ rights and fostering competitiveness in the global market. By examining the concept of “the death of the Author” as elucidated by Roland Barthes, the (...) study explores how AI-generated content challenges traditional notions of authorship and creativity. (shrink)

Artificially generated content threatens to seriously disrupt the public sphere. Generative AI massively facilitates the production of convincing portrayals of fabricated events. We have already begun to witness the spread of synthetic misinformation, political propaganda, and non-consensual intimate deepfakes. Malicious uses of the new technologies can only be expected to proliferate over time. In the face of this threat, social media platforms must surely act. But how? While it is tempting to think they need new sui generis policies targeting (...) synthetic content, we argue that the challenge posed by generative AI should be met through the enforcement of general platform rules. We demonstrate that the threat posed to individuals and society by AI-generated content is no different in kind from that of ordinary harmful content—a threat which is already well recognised. Generative AI massively increases the problem but, ultimately, it requires the same approach. Therefore, platforms do best to double down on improving and enforcing their existing rules, regardless of whether the content they are dealing with was produced by humans or machines. (shrink)

IGGA (Industrial Guidelines/policy statements for Generative AIs) is a comprehensive dataset comprising 160 guidelines and policy statements pertaining to the use of generative AIs and large language models across 14 industry sectors. These guidelines were systematically selected and gathered from official company websites and reliable sources spanning six continents. The dataset, containing 295,692 words, is designed to support various natural language processing tasks, including language modeling, sentiment analysis, semantic analysis, model synthesis, classification, and topic labeling. Additionally, it serves (...) as a benchmark for tasks such as ambiguity detection and requirements categorization. This resource aims to advance research in AI governance within industrial settings, fostering a deeper understanding of how AI technologies are integrated into industry practices. (2024-11-17). (shrink)

The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) is a groundbreaking regulatory framework that integrates technical concepts and terminology from the rapidly evolving ecosystems of AI research and innovation into the legal domain. Precise definitions accessible to both AI experts and lawyers are crucial for the legislation to be effective. This paper provides an interdisciplinary analysis of the concepts of AI system, general purpose AI system, foundation model and generative AI across the different versions of the legal text (Commission (...) proposal, Parliament position and Council General Approach) before the final political agreement. The goal is to help bridge the understanding of these key terms between the technical and legal communities and contribute to a proper implementation of the AI Act. We provide an analysis of the concept of AI system considering its scientific foundation and the crucial role that it plays in the regulation, which requires a sound definition both from legal and technical standpoints. We connect the outcomes of this discussion with the analysis of the concept of general purpose AI system and its evolution during the negotiations. We also address the distinct conceptual meanings of AI system vs AI model and explore the technical nuances of the term foundation model. We conclude that rooting the definition of foundation model to its general purpose capabilities following standardised evaluation methodologies appears to be most appropriate approach. Lastly, we tackle the concept of generative AI, arguing that definitions of AI system that include “content” as one of the system’s outputs already captures it, and concluding that not all generative AI is based on foundation models. (shrink)

Generative AI (GenAI) has the potential to affect artists’ control over their own music due to the illegal usage of copyrighted material for training. However, GenAI also creates exciting opportunities for artists to expand their material and working processes. Artists working with GenAI and documenting their outcomes can assist other artists as well as wider society in understanding how GenAI operates and can benefit human artistic output. This paper provides an autoethnographic case study into how a new GenAI tool (...) influenced an established composing practice during the writing of the experimental musical work, Control Yourself (2023). The Koup Music prototype by Kopi Su Studio was trained on vocal inputs by the author and subsequently generated bespoke sonic material. While identifiably true to the author’s musical—and literal—voice, the outputs were novel and perceived as imbued with emotion, leading to subsequent anthropomorphising of the AI. Written by a former AI sceptic, this paper details how the emotive power of the AI’s non-verbal, human-like sounds informed the narrative and structure of the resulting work and imparted a sense of collaboration, rather than solo authorship. Furthermore, the influence of the AI was felt beyond its actual involvement, with the project taking on a more playful approach less centred on the artistic control of the human composer. Following these observations, this paper discusses how GenAI served as a tool for musical experimentation and exploring creative ‘blind spots.’ These insights are also contextualised by current discourse on the perception and use of GenAI in the arts, the role of artistic control in human–AI co-creation, and how anthropomorphism has manifested in past human–AI partnerships. (shrink)

Most current discussions around ‘AI’ frame these technologies as tools or assistants at the service of human actors. While convenient, these metaphors might obscure the fact that the effective training of Large Language Models and other kinds of machine learning systems require intensive data scraping and processing only available to the largest tech companies in the world. With that in mind, this essay seeks to examine the effects of generative AI in the field of arts, culture, and creativity by (...) comparing these systems to social institutions. We contend that, similar to the modern museum, neural networks enable protocols of governance and dispersion that amplify the purchase of certain cultural signals. Operating at scale, these technologies function much like an archive, which Michel Foucault examined as a locus for the accumulation and exercise of power. We argue that, if left unchecked, AI models might provoke a significant skewing of whole socio-cultural milieus according to their statistical rationality, toward what Hito Steyerl described as ‘mean images.’ We demonstrate how this skewing takes place in art projects such as Nora Al-Badri’s Babylonian Visions, which seems to reproduce a kind of essentialization typical of a colonial episteme, disconnecting visual patterns from historical circumstances and ways of doing. In conclusion, we propose that a comparison between AI models and the modern museum may shed new light on issues of data extractivism, cultural expropriation, and the assimilation of otherness through stereotypification and homogenization as accomplished by algorithmic means. (shrink)

Accurate skin lesion segmentation is an important task in dermatology for facilitating early diagnosis and treatment planning. The challenges in skin lesion segmentation comprehend the variability in lesion, low contrast, heterogeneous backgrounds, overlapping or connected lesions, noise and certain artifacts. Despite of these challenges, Deep learning models accomplish remarkable results for skin lesion segmentation by automatically learning discriminative features. The current research introduces a novel approach utilizing the ASSP-based Deeplabv3+ for skin lesion segmentation along with other UNET-based learners while employing (...) VGG-16, VGG-19 and Dense nets as encoders. In addition, an analysis is conducted on GAN-UNET to evaluate the potential of Generative Artificial Intelligence in generating segmented images of skin lesions. Three benchmark medical image datasets, namely ISIC-2016, ISIC-2018, and HAM10000 Lesion Boundary Segmentation, are used to evaluate all five models. The models are trained exclusively on the ISIC-2018 dataset. A comparative analysis is performed, comparing the performance of these models against state-of-the-art segmentation methods, focusing on standard computer vision metrics. The proposed Deeplabv3+ model outperforms by showcasing its ability to accurately delineate skin lesions and surpassing existing techniques in terms of segmentation accuracy as 0.97, Jaccard coefficient as 0.84 and dice coefficient as 0.91. (shrink)

Cohen’s article (2023) on the significance of ChatGPT for bioethics suggests that little is known about the development of generative AI (“GAI”) in China and other national markets. It warns about...

On 8th August 2019, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Matt Hancock, announced the creation of a £250 million NHS AI Lab. This significant investment is justified on the belief that transforming the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) into a more informationally mature and heterogeneous organisation, reliant on data-based and algorithmically-driven interactions, will offer significant benefit to patients, clinicians, and the overall system. These opportunities are realistic and should not be wasted. However, they may be missed (one may (...) recall the troubled Care.data programme) if the ethical challenges posed by this transformation are not carefully considered from the start, and then addressed thoroughly, systematically, and in a socially participatory way. To deal with this serious risk, the NHS AI Lab should create an Ethics Advisory Board and monitor, analyse, and address the normative and overarching ethical issues that arise at the individual, interpersonal, group, institutional and societal levels in AI for healthcare. (shrink)

This study examines the influence of perceived intelligence, knowledge acquisition, and emotional responses on the utilization and word-of-mouth (WOM) promotion of AI technologies like ChatGPT, utilizing a sample size of 296 university students. Utilizing PLS-SEM, the analysis confirms that both perceived intelligence and knowledge acquisition significantly enhance perceived utilitarian benefits, supporting the extended Technology Acceptance Model. Notably, the presence of guilt feelings was found to diminish both utilitarian and hedonic benefits, indicating that emotional responses can significantly alter technology engagement outcomes. (...) Specifically, guilt feelings were associated with reduced utilization and WOM, except where the direct influence on usage was not supported. Additionally, the novelty and customization of the technology significantly increased hedonic benefits, which in turn positively influenced both usage and WOM recommendations. Multi-group analysis further differentiated the effects between male and female users, revealing gender differences in how these factors impact technology acceptance and use. (shrink)

The rapid adoption of commercial Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) products raises important questions around the impact this technology will have on our communicative interactions. This paper provides an analysis of some of the potential implications that Artificial Intelligence-Mediated Communication (AI-MC) may have on epistemic trust in online communications, specifically on social media. We argue that AI-MC poses a risk to epistemic trust being diminished in online communications on both normative and descriptive grounds. Descriptively, AI-MC seems to (roughly) lower (...) levels of epistemic trust. Normatively, we argue that this brings about the following dilemma. On the one hand, there are at least some instances where we should epistemically trust AI-MC less, and therefore the reduction in epistemic trust is justified in these instances. On the other hand, there are also instances where we epistemically trust AI-MC less, but this reduction in epistemic trust is not justified, resulting in discrimination and epistemic injustice in these instances. The difficulty in knowing which of these two groups any instance of AI-MC belongs to brings about the AI-MC dilemma: We must choose between maintaining normal levels of epistemic trust and risking epistemic gullibility when reduced trust is justified, or adopting generally reduced epistemic trust and risking epistemic injustice when such reduced trust is unjustified. Navigating this choice between problematic alternatives creates a significant challenge for social media as an epistemic environment. (shrink)

AI technologies are rapidly advancing and have shown potential for providing significant value across a variety of sectors, including healthcare. Much of research has focused on the technologies’ capabilities and pushing their boundaries, with many envisioning AI and AI-enabled robots replacing human labor and humans in the near future. However, in critical domains of professional practice such as healthcare, full replacement is neither realistic nor aimed for, and collaboration between AI and humans is a given for the foreseeable (...) future. This article argues for a shift away from a sole focus on the efficiency and effectiveness of technology, proposing instead that AI-enabled technologies increasingly should learn to adapt to human users considering that healthcare professionals already are overburdened. Rather than contributing to this burden, AI might extend the professional self by anticipating and supporting human needs and intentions. Drawing on a selective meta-synthesis of recent reviews and studies, this article introduces the concept of the _AI-extended professional self_. This concept suggests a temporary, dynamic integration of human professionals with AI that extends their capabilities with minimal additional burdens regarding training and application. Through three exemplars from healthcare—healthcare consultations, breast cancer screening, and robotic surgery—this article explores how a perspective rooted in the AI-extended professional self might unlock the potential for deeper AI integration into professional practice. Beyond these exemplars, this article calls for interdisciplinary research into the associated potential and challenges, advocating that the burden of AI integration needs to shift from humans to AI-enabled technologies. (shrink)