Google Deepmind’s New Resident Philosopher Tackles AI Ethics

How should humans relate to generative AI ? In what ways do we, or should we, treat a large language model (LLM) as if it were a person? If an AI became conscious, how could we tell? Does it make sense to think AI could some day have moral rights? These are among the cognitive and ethical questions that occupied philosopher Henry Shevlin at Cambridge University’s Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence . But last May Shevlin became part of the growing cohort of philosophers who work inside leading artificial intelligence companies. Though he remains active at Cambridge, he now spends 80 percent of his time at Google DeepMind (job title: “Philosopher”). Shevlin spoke with IEEE Spectrum about why philosophers are drawn to AI, how humans and AIs relate to one another, fears of “rogue” AI and AI relationships that harm humans, and how the question of AI consciousness may never have a simple “yes” or “no” answer. What made you want to switch from full-time academic philosopher to spending much of your time at an AI Lab? Henry Shevlin: Three factors. One is that I had lots of brilliant students from DeepMind. Two, the potential for direct impact. I can’t go into details, but on one occasion, after I gave a lecture [at Deep Mind], someone who worked for a major financial institution led changes in their organization that I think positively impact millions of people. There have been quite a few instances like that. Three, my sense of deep commonality between DeepMind culture and the kind of scientific attitude I like. And there’s a fourth point: [AI labs are] where really

No clear claim about AI's effect on society

This is a profile piece about an individual's role and views, not a report of a concrete societal outcome. The claimed impact on 'millions of people' is vague and unverifiable. Implications for flourishing are speculative and mild either way.

The article describes a philosopher joining Google DeepMind to work on AI ethics, which is a positive development for responsible AI. However, it largely discusses the nature of the work and the challenges, rather than offering concrete solutions or specific societal impacts. The 'impact on millions' claim is vague and lacks detail.

The article discusses the integration of philosophy into AI ethics within a major AI company. It highlights potential positive impacts but does not provide specific evidence of harm or benefit to society. The rapid advancement of AI technology is noted, but the implications are uncertain.

SOURCE     IEEE Spectrum: AI (tier 1)
   ↓
DOCUMENT   b3b37276-4de7-4de4-b58d-d66df18397c8
           https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-ethics-deepmind-philosopher-shevlin
   ↓
EVIDENCE   1 extracted excerpt
   ↓
MODEL RUN  4 runs, methodology 1.0.1
   ↓
SCORE      -23  (Adverse)
   ↓
CONFIDENCE 75%