Seite - 542 - in Menschenrechte und Gerechtigkeit als bleibende Aufgaben - Beiträge aus Religion, Theologie, Ethik, Recht und Wirtschaft

© 2020, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783847111658 – ISBN E-Lib: 9783737011655 throughthe1950s in the fieldsofbothbiomedical sciences andnuclear energy therewasaperceptionthatPandora’sBoxhadbeenopenedandthatethicscould notsettheframeworkfortechnologicaldevelopmentbutcouldonlydealwiththe negative consequences after the fact.Moreover, there was a scepticism about what the establishment of ethical principles could achieve in the face of the momentumassociatedwithscientificadvancement.Yet, inthebiomedical field, the principles of non-maleficence andbeneficence, humandignity, autonomy, equalityandconsent(frequentlycriticizedfortheirabstractnature)haveindeed shapedtheregulatoryenvironment, andhavebeencodified inethical and legal instruments, at the national, transnational and global level. For example, the HelsinkiDeclaration (1964) has determinedwhat is acceptable in termsof re- searchonhumansubjects,andrecognisesthattheresearchimperativecannever takeprecedenceovertheinterestsofindividualresearchsubjects.Therearealso comparable internationalethical codesdetermining thepurposesandlimitson genome research, the use and sale of humanorgans, and the regulationof re- productive technologies etc. Similarly, in thearenaofnuclear energy there is a global governance and inspection regime that deals with safety, security and non-proliferation. Although frequently under strain, both the IAEA, and the Non-proliferation Treaty (1968) have performed important supervisory and mitigating functions over the decades since their inception. In the field ofAI thereisnot,asyet,aninternationalgovernanceframeworktoaddresstheethical andhumanrightsissuesraisedbyAI.However,thedevelopmentofsucharegime isessential,andurgent,especiallysinceAIisatasignificantthresholdandcanbe scaledeitherpositivelyornegatively. ManyofourconversationstendtoclusteraroundthethreatsandrisksthatAI poses toemployment, to thereliabilityofnews, tocivil liberties.However,with the title ‘Designing an Ethical Future: Can AI Help?’ I wish to suggest that, althoughAIcreates somenewethical problems, for themostpart it highlights existing ethical problems, for example of systemic biases, inequality, lack of transparency,deficits inaccountability inbigbusiness andgovernment.These ethical challenges already pose a threat to the achievement of justice, but they riskbeingamplifiedandre-inscribed inandthroughmachine learningandAI. Thus,AIprovides thisgenerationwithamomentofopportunityandamoment of reckoning. It provides an opportunity to understand the highmoral stakes that are associated with the scaling of these technologies, an opportunity to appreciate the risks to societywhendemocraticprinciples are sacrificed in the pursuit of either efficiencyorprofit, anopportunity for thepublic to resist the lureof convenience and to engagewith thedigital revolutionas citizens rather than simply consumers. Global initiatives like ICT4D (Information andCom- LindaHogan542 Open-Access-Publikation im Sinne der CC-Lizenz BY 4.0