I went to my first AI unconference the other week. It was good to get out and meet up with a few old friends, make some new ones, and chat about how to how to give people and communities a more powerful say in public sector technologies.
As you can see from the main picture – showing the DIY conference grid – AI was discussed in many different ways (spreadsheet). There were sessions on AI and charities, AI’s impact on climate, AI and the use of health data and on AI and creativity. Not forgetting my favourite: the AI distraction.
It doesn’t feel hyperbolic to say that we are living in the age of AI with everything. Sir Keir Starmer has said AI is central to the UK’s industrial strategy. Investors are falling over themselves to put money into AI-focused companies. Former Facebook funder Roger McNamee and others are predicting an AI bubble. The hype cycle feels truly at its peak.
AI can be our friend, fix our relationship problems, offer excellent customer service, write our essays and do our shopping. It can help find a cure for cancer, enable us to live on Mars, revive democracy and solve world hunger. It has the potential to do all these things. And yet…this feels like magical thinking at scale. How is AI so completely dominating the conversation that we can’t see the wood for the trees?
The age of AI brings its own problems – it’s not the universal panacea we would love it to be
Move fast, break things
This event felt like the start of a conversation (and kudos to the fab folks at Connected By Data for putting it on). But even then, it feels like we’re many years behind what might be the typical exchange at any AI startup. The pace of change in AI development has been so fast that it’s impossible for most businesses, let alone the policy and legislation-driven public sector, to keep up.
To take just one example, the Atlantic recently published its LibGen search tool. And my social media has been awash with posts from friends and colleagues who have found out their work is on the pirated books database that was used a while ago to train Meta’s AI, without acknowledgement or authorisation.
My book, Monkeys with Typewriters, was also on the list. But I won’t expect a cheque from Mark Zuckerberg any time soon. Because why would Meta ask us when it’s easier to simply take? “This must be stopped at once!” commented someone on a viral LinkedIn post. To which Meta would probably reply (as if they bothered replying to anyone), “Oh yeah? You and who’s army?”
Cognitive dissonance
“Who’s army?” is a relevant question in today’s political landscape. As the new US leadership continues to act in ways that leave the post-war alliance, NATO and the liberal world order looking shaky, it’s clear that playing by the rules is no longer a thing. It’s more like everyone for themselves. And tech billionaires – having both money and power – are pretty much free to do whatever they like.
We seem to be living in two parallel universes: one where careful public servants debate digital inclusion and engagement, while Silicon Valley executives just do whatever they damn well please. To use a phrase beloved of Channel’s 4’s The Last Leg, is it ok to be signing multi-million pound contracts with these technology companies and giving them access to our data?
The Sycamore Collective, a group formed by Careful Industries founder Rachel Coldicutt and other concerned technologists, has sent an open letter to Keir Starmer with 10 questions they believe the government must answer before signing away millions of pounds worth of taxpayers’ money. Question 8 asks “what steps are being taken to avoid locking the UK into expensive contracts which cannot be easily undone if the technology doesn’t deliver?”
I’d take this one step further to ask about the underlying ethics of any technology partnership, especially with a US based company.
New world order
Many have observed how some in Silicon Valley follow Peter Thiel’s network state ideology of a succession from democracy. Meanwhile Francis Fukuyama has written eloquently about Elon Musk and the decline of Western Civilisation. The Verge simply calls this the age of gangster tech.
Organisations like the Good Law Project and The Citizens have been set up to try and fight these men and their apparent disdain for any type of regulation. But is the UK government paying attention?
Palantir, Peter Thiel’s AI-platform, already operates a large chunk of the NHS. And Palantir is a client of Peter Mandelson, the new British Ambassador to the US, so ties with UK Labour are already conveniently close. I could go on, but hopefully you get at least some of the picture.
Anyway, I felt the geopolitics of AI was not fully addressed at this unconference. If it was, I sadly missed it. Maybe it’s all just too depressing! But if you share my concerns, please do get in touch.
Photos: Paul Clarke
