#ai ethics

I'm going to use the term 'affordance' in what follows, and I know from experience over the years that people misunderstand this term:

In psychology, affordance is what the environment offers the individual. In design, affordance has a narrower meaning; it refers to possible actions that an actor can readily perceive.

…

I'm not sure that pejorative terms such as AI 'slop' and AI 'psychosis' are helpful. Similarly, neither is 'cognitive surrender'. What's interesting is how similar or different over-reliance on a particular tool or workflow is for a particular individual. In that way, I think AI use can and should be considered in the same realm as 'addictions' to things like betting and algorithmic timelines.

…

The Open University has released v2 of its Responsible by Design (RBD) framework/guidance document. It's all very worthy, but I wonder if it makes much difference in practice?

RBD is our pioneering response to the ethical challenges of Generative AI in education. Rooted in student voice and aligned with institutional strategy, the framework enables staff and students to critically examine AI through six pillars: Bias, Sustainability, Exploitation, Access and Equity, Transparency and Opting Out. A practical, values-driven and easy-to-use framework, it provides reflective prompts and actionable solutions. The aim is to empower educators to make informed choices about how to use AI responsibly. The design response bank offers a practical starting point for exploring complex ethical issues, and a way to put suitable actions into practice when designing courses.

…

As a thought experiment, all things being equal, I think I'd rather go to China than the US at the moment.

It's just the arbitrariness and uncertainty of it all; one of the most powerful countries in the world taken over by an unpredictable narcissist.

…