Digital Dilemmas: Ethical AI in a Globalized World

The deployment of Artificial Intelligence in addressing global challenges marks a defining moment in technological evolution, juxtaposing the promise of innovative solutions against the backdrop of ethical dilemmas.

Guglielmo Tamburrini
Guglielmo Tamburrini
An MQ-9 Reaper drone, outfitted with precision-guided munitions and artificial intelligence, completes an autonomous landing and is directed on the tarmac. Photo by the California National Guard.

Global challenges such as pandemics, hunger, and climate crises demand innovative solutions, and AI stands at the forefront of this battle. Its application spans from enhancing pandemic response mechanisms to optimizing food distribution networks and implementing climate action strategies. However, the deployment of AI is not without its ethical dilemmas. These include its substantial carbon footprint and its increasing use in military operations, which present significant moral concerns.

This scenario underscores the urgent need for stringent ethical governance that aligns AI’s vast capabilities with global moral responsibilities and human values, advocating for a balanced approach that leverages AI’s potential for the greater good while mitigating its ethical risks. This balance is crucial in navigating the complexities of utilizing AI to address universal challenges, ensuring that technological advancements contribute positively to global well-being and uphold the principles of digital humanism.

AI and the Climate Dilemma: Navigating the Environmental Footprint

The ethical implications of AI in mitigating the climate crisis are profound and multifaceted. AI technologies present groundbreaking opportunities for monitoring and reducing carbon emissions, notably in high-impact sectors like transportation, energy production, and industrial manufacturing. These technologies can analyze vast data sets to identify patterns, predict outcomes, and suggest strategies that significantly curb environmental impact.

A concerted effort by AI stakeholders to establish clear guidelines, policies, and incentives for a greener AI is necessary.

Yet, the development and operation of AI systems themselves consume considerable energy, often contributing to the carbon footprint they aim to reduce. This paradox underscores the critical need for a balanced approach, where the potential of AI to drive climate action is harmonized with sustainable practices.

Efforts to assess and mitigate the environmental impact of AI are gaining momentum, with initiatives emphasizing the importance of considering the entire lifecycle of AI systems—from algorithm training to data storage. The challenge requires one to develop accurate metrics and models to quantify AI’s carbon footprint within the broader information and communication technology (ICT) sector. This endeavor is complicated by the need to account for AI-induced changes in societal behavior, including shifts in work, leisure, and consumption patterns.

Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort by AI stakeholders to establish clear guidelines, policies, and incentives for a greener AI. These should aim to limit the energy consumption of AI projects and commercial applications, ensuring at the same time equitable access to AI resources. Furthermore, decisions regarding which data to collect, preserve, or discard must be made with environmental sustainability in mind. Only through such comprehensive governance can AI technologies truly align with global sustainability goals, ensuring they contribute positively to the fight against the climate crisis while upholding climate justice and equitable distribution of AI environmental cost.

Addressing the Challenges of AI Weaponization

The increasing militarization of AI raises significant moral concerns. Notably, the ethical debate surrounding autonomous weapons systems (AWS) revolves around the protection of human life and dignity, crucial demands acknowledged in international humanitarian law (IHL). Concerns arise due to the potential for AWS to violate IHL principles, as demonstrated in the lab by instances of AI perceptual systems mistaking civilian objects for military targets. This raises questions about accountability for AWS actions tantamount to war crimes.

Moreover, the use of AWS is seen as a violation of human dignity, as decisions to take lives should presuppose an acknowledgement of the personhood of those affected. Without human decision-makers, AWS lack the interpersonal relationships necessary to recognize the dignity of potential victims, undermining ethical justifications for automatic life and death decisions in warfare.

International efforts, voiced by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN Secretary General and coalitions of NGOs, such as the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, advocate for the prohibition of lethal AWS escaping meaningful human control, motivated by IHL principles, the protection of human dignity, and threats to peace and stability. AWS could facilitate easier warfare with fewer soldiers involved, lead to unpredictable interactions on the battlefield, and exceed human cognitive capabilities, accelerating conflicts.

 The climate crisis and the militarization of AI underscore the distinction between local and more global ethical concerns.

In the realm of cyberwarfare, AI systems present similar challenges. They potentially offer both defensive capabilities and threats of more efficient cyberattacks, raising concerns about attacks on critical infrastructure, including attacks on modernized software infrastructures for nuclear weapons command and control. The combination of AI cyberweapons with nuclear capabilities heightens the risk to global stability and human civilization, echoing warnings dating back to the Russell-Einstein Manifesto in 1955.

The development of AWS and AI for cyberconflicts signals a more comprehensive race to the militarization of AI, necessitating international regulation to prevent unchecked proliferation. Digital humanism, grounded in universal ethical values and the protection of human dignity, emerges as a vital framework for guiding policies in this domain. It emphasizes the need to prioritize ethical considerations and human well-being in the development and deployment of AI technologies, advocating for measures to curb the potential harms of AI militarization.

Conclusion: Navigating Digital Dilemmas

In conclusion, while much of the AI ethics discourse has focused on localized issues within specific application domains, such as discrimination and fairness in automatic loan approvals, school admissions or hiring decisions, our attention here has shifted towards the broader global implications of AI ethics. Highlighted examples like the climate crisis and the militarization of AI underscore the distinction between local and more global ethical concerns, emphasizing the need for comprehensive governance at all levels in navigating the ethically double-edged roles of AI.

Recognizing AI’ impact on large-scale threats to humanity, such as the climate crisis and risks to international peace is central to pursue the goals of digital humanism. By addressing these global ethical challenges, which transcend individual contexts, we strive not only to ensure the well-being of all members of the human species but also to promote universal human values as we continue to integrate AI technologies into our societies.

Adapted from an academic work for a wider audience, under license  CC BY 4.0

Share This Article
Professor of Philosophy of Science and Technology at Universita’ di Napoli Federico II in Italy. His research interests focus on ELSE (Ethical, Legal, and SocioEconomic) issues arising in the context of AI, human-computer, and human-robot interactions.