Comment by verisimi

Wow - I picked up on this earlier today, and even quoted the same as in this article. I was amazed that the scientists had not considered that AI could be/is being used for harm. (Was downvoted for this, but whatevs.)

It struck me as incredibly naive, but then - what would someone else do in their situation? Most of us work in silos without awareness of how our work is used, and I suspect we are often causing (unintentional) harm to others whether we are scientists, programmers, in finance, in health, in government, etc. If we realise our predicament, there isn't an moral authority to make things right. There is only the legislation that was been written by lobbyists paid by the corporations we work for.

Putting the article in broader context, perhaps it is about the creation of a moral framework for AI intended to pacify our disgust at the system we find. I expect that we will be expected to look away as AI "ethics" committees justify the unjustifiable, but call it ethical. As whatever-it-is is found to be ethical after all by ethical authorities, most of us we will wave this through and consider that we have acted judiciously. IMO.