Analyze the Google article using Rawls’ Justice Theory only.
Talk about what may have happened if the company had used that theory in resolving their decision/situation that you just read about in the article. For example, if Google had applied Rawls’ Justice Theory in making their decision on using AI, would the end result still be the same? Why or why not?
Formal directions: Identify the article’s major and its minor ethical issues, and analyze them from the perspective of that decision rule—as if you are “trying it on” as the decision rule that you might live by.
The paper must be between 275 and 300 words (absolutely no more); place your name and word count in the upper right-hand corner of the paper. You should think in terms of writing a 350-400 word paper, and then paring it down and crafting it into a very tight, brief paper that fits into the required word range. Do not write a “short” paper and then engage in puffery. The paper must be double spaced in Times New Roman 12-point font.
Your grade will be determined based on how closely your paper matches the above requirements, along with the depth of your analysis and the accuracy of your application of the decision rule. Invest sufficient time into thinking through, drafting, and refining your paper: It accounts for 20% of your course grade.
This is the Article:
Title: Google and Microsoft’s AI arms race could have ‘unintended consequences,’ an AI ethicist warns
Analysis by Oliver Darcy, CNN
Updated 8:49 AM ET, Tue February 7, 2023
New York (CNN)Google is officially set to confront OpenAI’s ChatGPT — and soon.
The tech titan, which has had a stranglehold on internet search for as long as most web users can remember, formally announced Monday that it will roll out Bard, its experimental conversational AI service, in the “coming weeks.”
The announcement comes just a day before Microsoft (MSFT), which is working to integrate ChatGPT-like technology into its products, including its search engine Bing, is set to hold an event with OpenAI at its Washington state headquarters.
“The internet search wars are back,” wrote the Financial Times’ Richard Waters in a piece published Monday, noting that AI has “opened the first new front in the battle for search dominance since Google fended off a concerted challenge from Microsoft’s Bing more than a decade ago.”
But the rapid emergence of the technology has also raised serious ethical questions, especially since it is being taken to market at a breakneck speed.
“We are reliving the social media era,” said Beena Ammanath, who leads Trustworthy Tech Ethics at Deloitte and is the executive director of the Global Deloitte AI Institute.
Ammanath said that “unintended consequences” accompany every new technology and reluctantly expressed confidence that it too will occur with AI chatbots, unless significant precautions are taken. For now, she doesn’t see the guardrails in place to rein in the nascent technology. Instead, Ammanath equated what is currently transpiring with the swift deployment of AI as companies “building Jurassic Park, putting some danger signs on the fences, but leaving all the gates open.” Yes, there is some acknowledgment about the dangers the technology poses. But it’s not enough, given the risks.
Ammanath stressed that computer scientists working on AI have yet to solve for bias, a years-long problem, as well as other worrisome issues that plague the technology. One major problem is that AI bots cannot separate truth from fantasy.
“The challenge with new language models is they blend fact and fiction,” Ammanath told me. “It spreads misinformation effectively. It cannot understand the content. So it can spout out completely logical sounding content, but incorrect. And it delivers it with complete confidence.”
That’s effectively what happened last month when CNET was forced to issue corrections on a number of articles, including some that it described as “substantial,” after using an AI-powered tool to help the news outlet write dozens of stories. And in its wake, other outlets like BuzzFeed, are already embracing the robot-writing technology to help it generate content and quizzes.
“This is a new dimension that generative AI has brought in,” Ammanath added.
In announcing that Google will roll out its AI soon, chief executive Sundar Pichai stressed that “it’s critical that we bring experiences rooted in these models to the world in a bold and responsible way.” And Pichai underscored that Google is “committed to developing AI responsibly.”
But it’s hard to deny that the company, under tremendous pressure from investors after ChatGPT stormed onto the scene, is not rushing to deploy its product to the market as quickly as possible. In an internal note to staff, Pichai himself said all hands are on deck and that the company will be “enlisting every Googler to help shape Bard and contribute through a special company-wide” event he said will have “the spirit of an internal hackathon.”
“We’ve been approaching this effort with an intensity and focus that reminds me of early Google,” Pichai wrote, “so thanks to everyone who has contributed.”
But it’s clear that both Google and Microsoft, some of the most valuable and pioneering companies on the web, understand well that AI technology has the power to reshape the world as we know it. The only question is will they follow Silicon Valley’s “move fast and break things” maxim that has caused so much turmoil in the past? (end of article)
According to Rawls’ theory, justice requires that social goods and resources be distributed in a way that is fair and just for all members of society. Rawls argues that the distribution of social goods and resources should be based on two principles of justice: the principle of equal basic liberties and the difference principle. The principle of equal basic liberties requires that each person has an equal right to the most extensive basic liberties compatible with a similar liberty for other
Looking for a similar assignment?
Let Us write for you! We offer custom paper writing services
Applying Rawls’ theory to the Google article, we can see that Google’s practices align with the principle of equal basic liberties. Google has created an inclusive workplace environment that values diversity, equality, and fairness. The company has implemented policies and initiatives to ensure that all employees have equal access to opportunities, regardless of their gender, race, or other characteristics. Google’s commitment to equal basic liberties is exemplified in their diversity and inclusion report, which outlines the company’s efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in their workforce.
However, the application of the difference principle in the context of Google’s practices is more complex. While Google has implemented initiatives to promote diversity and inclusion, there are still social and economic inequalities within the company. For example, there is a gender pay gap at Google, with women earning less than men for the same roles. Additionally, there is a lack of diversity in leadership positions, with men holding a disproportionate amount of high-level positions.
To align with the difference principle, Google could take steps to address these inequalities and ensure that social and economic benefits are distributed to the least advantaged members of the company. This could include implementing policies to close the gender pay gap and increasing diversity in leadership positions.
In conclusion, applying Rawls’ Justice Theory to the Google article highlights the company’s commitment to equal basic liberties but also exposes areas where the company could improve its practices to align with the difference principle. By addressing these inequalities, Google could promote a more just and fair distribution of social and economic benefits within the company.