គុណធម៌ AI ដែលបាត់ធាតុផ្សំ Bedrock សម្រាប់ការទទួលខុសត្រូវ AI និយាយថា ក្រមសីលធម៌ AI និងច្បាប់ AI

Are you virtuous?

Before you answer that question, let’s unpack the meaning of virtue and you can then take a concerted stab at elucidating your virtuousness.

Also, you’ll be perhaps surprised to know that virtues are a rising topic in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI), especially in the realm of AI Ethics and AI Law. I’ll first cover some fundamentals about virtues and then jump into the latest thinking on AI Virtues. Yes, in short, AI Virtues are being bandied around as a precursor of sorts to Ethical AI and ultimately AI Law as well. For my ongoing and extensive overall coverage of AI Ethics and AI Law, see តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ និង តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ, គ្រាន់តែឈ្មោះមួយចំនួន។

First, ponder what is meant by referring to virtues and virtuousness.

Some would say that virtue is a quality or characteristic of showcasing outstanding morals. A virtuous person abides by the highest ethical or moral standards. The Latin word គុណធម៌ was purportedly used by the Romans to emphasize moral rectitude and particularly valorous or heroic behavior. These are all rather high-minded concepts and crucial connotations associated with being virtuous.

There has been quite a lot of handwringing throughout history about what constitutes the core or keystones of virtue. Are there three keystones, five keystones, ten keystones, or how many exactly might there be?

For example, the so-called ខា virtues are said to be these four precepts:

1) Prudence

2) កម្លាំង

3) Temperance

4) Justice (fairness)

Perhaps you should be mulling over your virtuousness by examining yourself in a serious sense of self-reflection on the basis of those four keystones. Do you showcase top-notch prudence? Do you showcase top-notch fortitude? Do you showcase top-notch temperance? And do you showcase top-notch fairness (justice) in your endeavors?

Notice that I keep saying that you have to “showcase” these foundational measures. It is one thing to perhaps harbor those in your mind, and it can be an entirely different matter to invoke those into real-world actions and deeds. The possibility of being virtuous solely in your mind is not what we are aiming to consider here. You have to take what is in your mind and turn it into reality.

Talk the talk, plus you need to genuinely walk the talk.

Another aspect is that you presumably need to abide by ទាំងអស់ of a considered set of keystones in order to truly be virtuous. If you were to be topnotch in prudence but failing or even slovenly in the other three of fortitude, temperance, and justice, you cannot seem to exhort that you are in fact virtuous. You are only partially so. We will insist that only if you abide by all such precepts can you carry proudly and loudly the flag of virtuousness. Thus, just meeting one, two, or three of these four precepts is insufficient. You might attain all four.

I am going to up the ante, so you’d better sit down for this next twist.

Researchers that have examined the list of virtues that seemed somewhat prominent during the Renaissance and other historical periods are apt to claim that there were seven virtues at that time:

1) Humility

៧) សេចក្តីសប្បុរស

3) Temperance

4) Chastity

5) Patience

6) Charity

7) Diligence

If that lucky seven was indeed the case, and if you are going to use those as the stated criteria for virtuousness, I regret to inform you that the prior list of four required virtues is expanded into seven. This means that whereas you only had four to abide by earlier, now you’ve got a whopping seven to contend with.

Once again, start to do a self-reflection across those seven keystones.

I dare say the bar seems to be rising and rising. Maybe you at first assumed that of course you are virtuous, but now as the hurdles keep coming your way of these now seven keystones, it might be a lot harder to make a bold proclamation of your virtue-boasting prowess.

The number of keystones can get quite high.

Benjamin Franklin famously noted that he believed there were thirteen keystones for being virtuous, consisting of (as laid out in his autobiography):

1) Temperance

2) ស្ងប់ស្ងាត់

3) Order

4) ដំណោះស្រាយ

5) Frugality

6) Industry

7) Sincerity

8) Justice

9) Moderation

10) Cleanliness

11) Tranquility

12) Chastity

13) Humility

Yikes, that’s a daunting list.

Keep in mind too that we are laying down a gauntlet that asserts you must be all of those keystones and cannot be less than ideal on any of them. It is an all-or-nothing proposition. We might concede that you could be ផ្នែកខ្លះ virtuous by abiding by some of the thirteen rather than all of them. We might also be willing to concede that you are partially virtuous if you at times are fully virtuous on all of them but then at other moments in time you are not attaining such completeness.

The gold star though only goes to those that attain all of the keystones at all times.

How many of us can meet that rigorous definition?

I guess that if you are raising your hand to have achieved this level of realization, we must do a cordial and congratulatory tip of the hat to you. Just to let you know, skeptics and cynics are bound to question the sincerity of your claims. Be so advised.

Now that we’ve got virtues onto the table, as it were, you might be wondering how virtues relate to ethics.

ខ្ញុំរីករាយដែលអ្នកបានសួរ។

One ardent belief is that virtues are what stoke ethics.

In this considered framework, your virtues will give rise to ethical efforts. Ergo, when someone rattles off a list of their ethical principles or rules, those are only rated as earnestly bona fide if also rooted in virtues. Your virtues drive toward your semblance of ethics.

I suppose a handy analogy might help.

We plant some seeds to grow flowers. The soil is essential to how those flowers are going to grow. We might be willing to say that the soil is the set of virtues, while the seeds and the flowers are the ethics that flow from that bedrock. Without suitable bedding, nothing else is likely to gain traction. You can chatter all day long about growing those flowers, but if the soil is bad or not conducive to matters at hand, you’ll need to anticipate faulty flowering or other related maladies will ensue.

You are welcome to make an objection to the crude analogy. Just wanted to get across an overarching sentiment on this virtue versus ethics conundrum. Be aware that some would say that virtues and ethics are one and the same. Others would say they are different. Of those that say they are different, there is the camp that indicates virtues are the bedrock and ethics are the outcropping (meanwhile, other camps with disparate views exist too).

To make it demonstrably apparent, not everyone agrees with the bedrock and outcropping way of looking at these matters. Nonetheless, we will proceed on that basis in this particular discussion. You can certainly argue at length at such a presumptive presumption, but at least be cognizant that this is an assumption herein and undertaken for the simple sake of fruitful discourse.

As a shorthand, let’s coin this as the សីលធម៌ គុណធម៌ conception.

Shifting gears a tad, mull over the trend today of flavorful ethics articulation and pontification.

A lot of debate takes place these days about ethics and asks openly what ethical rules or principles we are to observe. This is the case for how people behave. Furthermore, as you’ll see in a moment, there are proposed ethical rules or principles that AI ought to also observe.

The catch to the ruminations about ethical rules and ethical principles is that maybe we are concentrating on the wrong thing. Those in the virtue ethics camp would argue that rather than getting mired in the endless list of ethical rules and such, we would be wiser to focus on virtues. Get the virtues straightened out first, and from which the ethical rules will naturally flow.

Back to my analogy, we can get into heated discussions all day about the flowers we want to grow, but if we don’t first examine and make sure that we have the appropriate soil, none of the flower-growing ambitions are going to be of much practical use. Imagine that you’ve decided upon a bunch of flowers that seem quite compelling, yet it turns out that upon planting those seeds they never reach fruition because the soil wasn’t righted first.

You might even suggest that the constant din of what ethical rules to follow has become an undue obsession. It keeps getting hotter and more embroiled. In turn, we stray further and further away from the inner truth of having to put our eyes on virtues first.

In an insightful paper entitled Ethics and Virtue by researchers Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer, they provide this noteworthy remark that we might be able to turn the corner on this obstinance: “Fortunately, this obsession with principles and rules has been recently challenged by several ethicists who argue that the emphasis on principles ignores a fundamental component of ethics — គុណធម៌. These ethicists point out that by focusing on what people should do or how people should act, the ‘moral principles approach’ neglects the more important issue—what people should be. In other words, the fundamental question of ethics is not ‘What should I do?’ but ‘What kind of person should I be?’ According to ‘virtue ethics’, there are certain ideals, such as excellence or dedication to the common good, toward which we should strive and which allow the full development of our humanity” (posted at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University).

You might be vaguely aware that the AI realm has had its abundant share of proposals about AI Ethics principles and rules. You can readily find all manner and a number of pronounced Ethical AI precepts. They are a veritable dime a dozen, one might say.

The shocker, if you will, consists of the recent bubbling contestation that maybe, just maybe, we should be giving due attention to AI Virtues. Cease the crazy and furious finger-pointing about AI Ethics rules and principles, and instead cast your vision toward AI Virtues. If we can get the AI Virtues figured out, the rest will be easy-peasy (well, kind of, or at least more sensibly undertaken).

Before leaping into the AI Virtues topic, I’d like to first lay some essential foundation about AI and particularly AI Ethics and AI Law, doing so to make sure that the discussion will be contextually sensible.

ការកើនឡើងនៃការយល់ដឹងអំពីក្រមសីលធម៌ AI និងច្បាប់ AI ផងដែរ។

យុគសម័យថ្មីនៃ AI ត្រូវបានគេមើលឃើញដំបូងថាជា អាយអេសដើម្បីភាពល្អមានន័យថា យើងអាចប្រើប្រាស់ AI សម្រាប់ភាពប្រសើរឡើងនៃមនុស្សជាតិ។ នៅលើកែងជើងរបស់ អាយអេសដើម្បីភាពល្អ មក​ការ​ដឹង​ថា​យើង​ត្រូវ​បាន​ជ្រមុជ​ក្នុង​ផង​ដែរ​ អាយអេសសម្រាប់អាក្រក់. នេះរាប់បញ្ចូលទាំង AI ដែលត្រូវបានបង្កើត ឬកែប្រែខ្លួនឯងទៅជាការរើសអើង និងធ្វើការជ្រើសរើសតាមការគណនាដែលបង្កប់នូវភាពលំអៀងដែលមិនសមហេតុផល។ ពេលខ្លះ AI ត្រូវបានបង្កើតឡើងតាមរបៀបនោះ ខណៈពេលដែលក្នុងករណីផ្សេងទៀត វាចូលទៅក្នុងទឹកដីដែលមិនឆ្ពោះទៅរកនោះ។

ខ្ញុំ​ចង់​ធ្វើ​ឱ្យ​ប្រាកដ​ជា​ច្រើន​ថា​យើង​នៅ​លើ​ទំព័រ​តែ​មួយ​អំពី​លក្ខណៈ​នៃ AI សព្វថ្ងៃ។

មិនមាន AI ណាមួយដែលប្រកបដោយមនោសញ្ចេតនាទេ។ យើងមិនមាននេះទេ។ យើង​មិន​ដឹង​ថា​តើ​ AI ​អាច​នឹង​កើត​ឡើង​ឬ​អត់​នោះ​ទេ។ គ្មាននរណាម្នាក់អាចទស្សន៍ទាយបានច្បាស់ថា តើយើងនឹងសម្រេចបាន AI អារម្មណ៍ ឬថាតើ AI អារម្មណ៍នឹងកើតឡើងដោយអព្ភូតហេតុដោយឯកឯងក្នុងទម្រង់នៃ supernova នៃការយល់ដឹងតាមការគណនា (ជាទូទៅគេហៅថាឯកវចនៈ សូមមើលការគ្របដណ្តប់របស់ខ្ញុំនៅ តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ).

ប្រភេទនៃ AI ដែលខ្ញុំកំពុងផ្តោតលើមាន AI ដែលមិនមានអារម្មណ៍ដែលយើងមានសព្វថ្ងៃនេះ។ ប្រសិនបើយើងចង់ស្មានទុកជាមុនអំពី AI ប្រកបដោយការយល់ឃើញ ការពិភាក្សានេះអាចទៅក្នុងទិសដៅខុសគ្នាខ្លាំង។ AI ដែល​មាន​អារម្មណ៍​ថា​នឹង​មាន​គុណភាព​មនុស្ស។ អ្នកនឹងត្រូវពិចារណាថា AI អារម្មណ៍គឺស្មើនឹងការយល់ដឹងរបស់មនុស្ស។ ជាងនេះទៅទៀត ដោយសារមានការស្មានខ្លះៗថា យើងប្រហែលជាមាន AI ដ៏វៃឆ្លាត ដែលអាចសន្និដ្ឋានបានថា AI បែបនេះអាចឆ្លាតជាងមនុស្សទៅទៀត (សម្រាប់ការរុករករបស់ខ្ញុំនូវ AI ដ៏ឆ្លាតវៃជាលទ្ធភាព សូមមើល ការគ្របដណ្តប់នៅទីនេះ).

ខ្ញុំ​សូម​ណែនាំ​យ៉ាង​មុតមាំ​ថា​យើង​រក្សា​អ្វីៗ​នៅ​លើ​ផែនដី​ហើយ​ពិចារណា​អំពី​ការ​គណនា​មិន​គិត​ពី AI នាពេលបច្ចុប្បន្ននេះ។

ត្រូវដឹងថា AI នាពេលបច្ចុប្បន្ននេះ មិនអាច "គិត" តាមរបៀបណាមួយបានដូចការគិតរបស់មនុស្សនោះទេ។ នៅពេលអ្នកប្រាស្រ័យទាក់ទងជាមួយ Alexa ឬ Siri សមត្ថភាពសន្ទនាអាចហាក់ដូចជាស្រដៀងនឹងសមត្ថភាពរបស់មនុស្ស ប៉ុន្តែការពិតគឺថាវាមានលក្ខណៈគណនា និងខ្វះការយល់ដឹងរបស់មនុស្ស។ យុគសម័យចុងក្រោយបង្អស់របស់ AI បានប្រើប្រាស់យ៉ាងទូលំទូលាយនូវ Machine Learning (ML) និង Deep Learning (DL) ដែលមានឥទ្ធិពលលើការផ្គូផ្គងលំនាំគណនា។ នេះបាននាំឱ្យមានប្រព័ន្ធ AI ដែលមានរូបរាងដូចមនុស្ស។ ទន្ទឹមនឹងនេះដែរ សព្វថ្ងៃនេះមិនមាន AI ណាមួយដែលមានលក្ខណៈសមហេតុសមផលទេ ហើយក៏មិនមានការងឿងឆ្ងល់នៃការយល់ដឹងនៃការគិតដ៏រឹងមាំរបស់មនុស្សដែរ។

សូមប្រយ័ត្នចំពោះ AI នាពេលបច្ចុប្បន្ននេះ។

ML/DL គឺជាទម្រង់នៃការផ្គូផ្គងលំនាំគណនា។ វិធីសាស្រ្តធម្មតាគឺអ្នកប្រមូលផ្តុំទិន្នន័យអំពីកិច្ចការធ្វើការសម្រេចចិត្ត។ អ្នកបញ្ចូលទិន្នន័យទៅក្នុងម៉ូដែលកុំព្យូទ័រ ML/DL ។ គំរូទាំងនោះស្វែងរកលំនាំគណិតវិទ្យា។ បន្ទាប់ពីស្វែងរកគំរូបែបនេះ ប្រសិនបើរកឃើញនោះ ប្រព័ន្ធ AI នឹងប្រើលំនាំទាំងនោះនៅពេលជួបទិន្នន័យថ្មី។ នៅពេលបង្ហាញទិន្នន័យថ្មី គំរូដែលផ្អែកលើ "ទិន្នន័យចាស់" ឬទិន្នន័យប្រវត្តិសាស្រ្តត្រូវបានអនុវត្តដើម្បីបង្ហាញការសម្រេចចិត្តបច្ចុប្បន្ន។

ខ្ញុំ​គិត​ថា​អ្នក​អាច​ទាយ​ថា​តើ​នេះ​កំពុង​ទៅ​ណា​។ ប្រសិនបើ​មនុស្ស​ដែល​បាន​បង្កើត​គំរូ​តាម​ការ​សម្រេច​ចិត្ត​បាន​រួម​បញ្ចូល​ការ​លំអៀង​ដែល​មិន​ឆ្អែតឆ្អន់ នោះ​ការ​ខុសឆ្គង​គឺ​ថា​ទិន្នន័យ​បាន​ឆ្លុះ​បញ្ចាំង​ពី​ចំណុច​នេះ​តាម​វិធី​ស្រាលៗ ប៉ុន្តែ​សំខាន់។ ការ​ផ្គូផ្គង​គំរូ​ការ​សិក្សា​តាម​ម៉ាស៊ីន ឬ​ការ​រៀន​ជ្រៅ​នឹង​ព្យាយាម​ធ្វើ​ត្រាប់តាម​ទិន្នន័យ​តាម​គណិតវិទ្យា។ មិន​មាន​ភាព​ដូច​គ្នា​នៃ​សុភវិនិច្ឆ័យ ឬ​ទិដ្ឋភាព​មនោសញ្ចេតនា​ផ្សេង​ទៀត​នៃ​ការ​បង្កើត​គំរូ​ដែល​បង្កើត​ដោយ AI ក្នុង​មួយ។

ជាងនេះទៅទៀត អ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ AI ប្រហែលជាមិនដឹងពីអ្វីដែលកំពុងកើតឡើងនោះទេ។ គណិតវិទ្យា arcane នៅក្នុង ML/DL អាចធ្វើឱ្យវាពិបាកក្នុងការបំបាត់ភាពលំអៀងដែលលាក់នៅពេលនេះ។ អ្នកនឹងសង្ឃឹមយ៉ាងត្រឹមត្រូវ ហើយរំពឹងថាអ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ AI នឹងសាកល្បងសម្រាប់ភាពលំអៀងដែលអាចកប់បាន ទោះបីជាវាពិបាកជាងវាក៏ដោយ។ ឱកាសដ៏រឹងមាំមួយមានដែលថា ទោះបីជាមានការសាកល្បងយ៉ាងទូលំទូលាយថានឹងមានភាពលំអៀងនៅតែបង្កប់នៅក្នុងគំរូដែលត្រូវគ្នានឹងគំរូនៃ ML/DL ក៏ដោយ។

អ្នក​អាច​ប្រើ​សុភាសិត​ដ៏​ល្បី​ឬ​មិន​ល្អ​ខ្លះ​នៃ​ការ​ចោល​សំរាម​ក្នុង​ធុង​សំរាម។ រឿងនោះគឺថា នេះគឺស្រដៀងទៅនឹងភាពលំអៀងដែលបញ្ចូលទៅក្នុង insidiously ដូចជាភាពលំអៀងដែលលិចចូលទៅក្នុង AI ។ ក្បួនដោះស្រាយការសម្រេចចិត្ត (ADM) នៃ AI axiomatically ក្លាយជាបន្ទុកដោយភាពមិនស្មើគ្នា។

មិនល្អ។

ទាំងអស់នេះមានផលប៉ះពាល់យ៉ាងសំខាន់ AI Ethics និងផ្តល់នូវបង្អួចងាយស្រួលចូលទៅក្នុងមេរៀនដែលបានរៀន (សូម្បីតែមុនពេលមេរៀនទាំងអស់កើតឡើង) នៅពេលនិយាយអំពីការព្យាយាមបង្កើតច្បាប់ AI ។

ក្រៅពីការប្រើប្រាស់ច្បាប់សីលធម៌ AI ជាទូទៅ មានសំណួរដែលត្រូវគ្នាថាតើយើងគួរតែមានច្បាប់ដើម្បីគ្រប់គ្រងការប្រើប្រាស់ផ្សេងៗនៃ AI ដែរឬទេ។ ច្បាប់ថ្មីកំពុងត្រូវបានដាក់ពង្រាយនៅកម្រិតសហព័ន្ធ រដ្ឋ និងមូលដ្ឋាន ដែលទាក់ទងនឹងជួរ និងលក្ខណៈនៃរបៀបដែល AI គួរតែត្រូវបានបង្កើត។ ការ​ខិតខំ​ធ្វើ​សេចក្តី​ព្រាង និង​អនុម័ត​ច្បាប់​បែប​នេះ​ជា​បណ្តើរៗ។ ក្រមសីលធម៌ AI ដើរតួជាគម្លាតដែលត្រូវបានពិចារណា យ៉ាងហោចណាស់ ហើយស្ទើរតែនឹងប្រាកដក្នុងកម្រិតខ្លះត្រូវបានដាក់បញ្ចូលទៅក្នុងច្បាប់ថ្មីទាំងនោះ។

ត្រូវ​ដឹង​ថា​មាន​អ្នក​ខ្លះ​ប្រកែក​យ៉ាង​ម៉ឺងម៉ាត់​ថា​យើង​មិន​ត្រូវ​ការ​ច្បាប់​ថ្មី​ដែល​គ្រប​ដណ្ដប់​លើ AI ហើយ​ថា​ច្បាប់​ដែល​មាន​ស្រាប់​របស់​យើង​គឺ​គ្រប់គ្រាន់​ហើយ។ ពួកគេបានព្រមានថា ប្រសិនបើយើងអនុវត្តច្បាប់ AI មួយចំនួននេះ យើងនឹងសម្លាប់សត្វពពែមាស ដោយកាត់បន្ថយភាពជឿនលឿននៃ AI ដែលផ្តល់អត្ថប្រយោជន៍យ៉ាងច្រើនដល់សង្គម។

នៅក្នុងជួរមុន ខ្ញុំបានរៀបរាប់អំពីកិច្ចខិតខំប្រឹងប្រែងជាតិ និងអន្តរជាតិផ្សេងៗ ដើម្បីបង្កើត និងអនុម័តច្បាប់គ្រប់គ្រង AI សូមមើល តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ, ឧទាហរណ៍។ ខ្ញុំក៏បានគ្របដណ្តប់លើគោលការណ៍ និងគោលការណ៍ណែនាំអំពីក្រមសីលធម៌ AI ជាច្រើនដែលប្រជាជាតិនានាបានកំណត់ និងអនុម័ត រួមទាំងឧទាហរណ៍ការខិតខំប្រឹងប្រែងរបស់អង្គការសហប្រជាជាតិដូចជា UNESCO កំណត់ក្រមសីលធម៌ AI ដែលប្រទេសជិត 200 បានអនុម័ត។ តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ.

នេះគឺជាបញ្ជីគន្លឹះដ៏មានប្រយោជន៍នៃលក្ខណៈវិនិច្ឆ័យ AI សីលធម៌ ឬលក្ខណៈទាក់ទងនឹងប្រព័ន្ធ AI ដែលខ្ញុំបានស្វែងរកយ៉ាងជិតស្និទ្ធពីមុនមក៖

• តម្លាភាព
• យុត្តិធម៌ និងយុត្តិធម៌
• ភាពមិនអាក្រក់
• ការទទួលខុសត្រូវ
• ភាពឯកជន
• អត្ថប្រយោជន៍
• សេរីភាព និងស្វ័យភាព
• ការជឿទុកចិត្ត
• និរន្តរភាព
• សេចក្តីថ្លៃថ្នូរ
• សាមគ្គីភាព

គោលការណ៍ក្រមសីលធម៌ AI ទាំងនោះត្រូវបានគេសន្មត់ថាប្រើប្រាស់ដោយស្មោះស្ម័គ្រដោយអ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ AI រួមជាមួយនឹងអ្នកដែលគ្រប់គ្រងកិច្ចខិតខំប្រឹងប្រែងអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ AI និងសូម្បីតែអ្នកដែលនៅទីបំផុតអនុវត្ត និងថែរក្សាប្រព័ន្ធ AI ។

អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធទាំងអស់នៅទូទាំងវដ្តជីវិត AI នៃការអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ និងការប្រើប្រាស់ត្រូវបានចាត់ទុកថាស្ថិតក្នុងវិសាលភាពនៃការគោរពតាមបទដ្ឋានដែលត្រូវបានបង្កើតឡើងនៃ Ethical AI ។ នេះគឺជាការគូសបញ្ជាក់ដ៏សំខាន់មួយចាប់តាំងពីការសន្មត់ជាធម្មតាគឺថា "មានតែអ្នកសរសេរកូដ" ឬអ្នកដែលកម្មវិធី AI ប៉ុណ្ណោះដែលត្រូវប្រកាន់ខ្ជាប់នូវគោលគំនិតសីលធម៌របស់ AI ។ ដូចដែលបានសង្កត់ធ្ងន់ពីមុនមក វាត្រូវការភូមិមួយដើម្បីបង្កើត និងអនុវត្ត AI ហើយសម្រាប់ភូមិទាំងមូលត្រូវតែគោរព និងគោរពតាមសិក្ខាបទក្រមសីលធម៌ AI ។

ថ្មីៗនេះខ្ញុំក៏បានពិនិត្យ វិក័យប័ត្រនៃសិទ្ធិ AI ដែលជាចំណងជើងផ្លូវការនៃឯកសារផ្លូវការរបស់រដ្ឋាភិបាលសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកដែលមានចំណងជើងថា "Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American People" ដែលជាលទ្ធផលនៃកិច្ចខិតខំប្រឹងប្រែងរយៈពេលមួយឆ្នាំដោយការិយាល័យគោលនយោបាយវិទ្យាសាស្ត្រ និងបច្ចេកវិទ្យា (OSTP ) OSTP គឺជាអង្គភាពសហព័ន្ធដែលបម្រើការផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាដល់ប្រធានាធិបតីអាមេរិក និងការិយាល័យប្រតិបត្តិរបស់សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកអំពីទិដ្ឋភាពបច្ចេកវិទ្យា វិទ្យាសាស្ត្រ និងវិស្វកម្មផ្សេងៗនៃសារៈសំខាន់ជាតិ។ ក្នុងន័យនេះ អ្នកអាចនិយាយបានថា Bill of Rights របស់ AI នេះគឺជាឯកសារដែលត្រូវបានអនុម័ត និងយល់ព្រមដោយសេតវិមានអាមេរិកដែលមានស្រាប់។

នៅក្នុង AI Bill of Rights មាន XNUMX ប្រភេទសំខាន់ៗដូចជា៖

• ប្រព័ន្ធសុវត្ថិភាព និងមានប្រសិទ្ធភាព
• ការការពារការរើសអើងជាក្បួន
• ភាពឯកជនទិន្នន័យ
• សេចក្តីជូនដំណឹង និងការពន្យល់
• ជម្មើសជំនួសរបស់មនុស្ស ការពិចារណា និងការថយក្រោយ

ខ្ញុំបានពិនិត្យដោយប្រុងប្រយ័ត្ននូវសិក្ខាបទទាំងនោះ តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ.

Now that I’ve laid a helpful foundation on these related AI Ethics and AI Law topics, we are ready to jump into the heady topic of AI Virtues.

AI Virtues Getting Tuned Up To Aid Ethical AI

When I refer to AI Virtues, please realize that I am មិនមាន talking about sentient AI.

If (or some would contend ពេលណា​) we reach sentient AI, the sentient AI might or might not have a set of virtues. We can argue until the cows come home as to whether or not sentient AI will include its own semblance of virtues. Some pundits would insist that virtues are a humankind-only element that will be entirely and unquestionably absent from sentient AI.

Other pundits proclaim the exact opposite, namely that sentient AI will of course have virtues. In that latter case, we ought to be worrying about how to ensure that sentient AI has the right kind of virtues. Perhaps we can feed our virtues into the AI that becomes sentient. If that won’t work, we are going to hope that sentient AI is clever enough to realize the importance of virtues and divine them of its own volition.

Round and round that merry-go-round goes.

For today’s viewpoint, I’d like to keep our eyes on contemporary non-sentient AI.

In a provocative research paper entitled “A Virtue‑Based Framework To Support Putting AI Ethics Into Practice,” author Thilo Hagendorff proposes that we utilize សីលធម៌ គុណធម៌ and as a result might arrive at the belief that there are four foundational AI Virtues:

1) Justice

2) Honesty

3) Responsibility

4) Care

The paper posits that “Many ethics initiatives have stipulated sets of principles and standards for good technology development in the AI sector. However, several AI ethics researchers have pointed out a lack of practical realization of these principles. Following that, AI ethics underwent a practical turn, but without deviating from the principled approach. This paper proposes a complementary to the principled approach that is based on virtue ethics. It defines four “basic AI virtues”, namely justice, honesty, responsibility and care, all of which represent specific motivational settings that constitute the very precondition for ethical decision making in the AI field” (in Philosophy & Technology, ថ្ងៃទី 2022 ខែមិថុនា).

How did the four AI Virtues get derived?

According to the researcher, it is feasible to examine the multitude of AI Ethics precepts and pretty much back your way into what the underlying keystone AI Virtues would necessarily be. All you need to do is a bit of mindful analysis and you can turn the morass into something nice and neat. As stated: “When sifting through all these principles, one can, by using a reductionist approach and clustering them into groups, distill four basic virtues that cover all of them” (ibid).

Various charts and figures are included, which proffer that we might construe the four AI Virtues as consisting of these embodiments when it comes to AI Ethics principles or rules:

• AI Virtue of Justice: AI Ethics precepts include algorithmic fairness, non-discrimination, bias mitigation, inclusion, equality, diversity, etc.
• AI Virtue of Honesty: AI Ethics precepts include transparency, openness, explainability, interpretability, technological disclosure, open source, acknowledge errors and mistakes, etc.
• AI Virtue of Responsibility: AI Ethics precepts include responsibility, liability, accountability, replicability, legality, accuracy, considering long-term technological consequences, etc.
• AI Virtue of Care: AI Ethics precepts include non-maleficence, harm, safety, privacy, protection, precaution, hidden costs, beneficence, well-being, sustainability, peace, common good, solidarity, social cohesion, freedom, autonomy, liberty, consent, etc.

Putting yourself into the shoes of having to do this kind of reverse engineering, this is what the research paper suggested ought to be mentally performed: “Does virtue A describe character dispositions that, when internalized by AI practitioners, will intrinsically motivate them to act in a way that ‘automatically’ ensures or makes it more likely that the outcomes of their actions, among others, result in technological artefacts that meet the requirements that principle X specifies? Or, in short, does virtue A translate into behavior that is likely to result in an outcome that corresponds to the requirements of principle X?” (ibid).

It is probably safe to say that we might not all reach the same conclusions.

There would seem to be plenty of room to argue that a particular AI Ethics precept belongs in some particular AI Virtue or reasonably placed into some other one, or maybe belongs in more than one, etc. This can readily go back and forth, doing so in a civilized and well-mannered tone (no need to switch into angry polarizing angsts).

You can go even deeper into this slicing-and-dicing by coming up with additional AI Virtues beyond the stated four and making a reasoned claim that there are more AI Virtues to be had. One supposes you could also try to reduce the count to say only three or two AI Virtues, though that would likely put you on a rather wobbly philosophical and semi-impractical grounding.

Before you start over-analyzing the four AI Virtues, you ought to know that the research paper indicates that there are two additional second-order AI Virtues that come into the mix. The two added second-order AI Virtues are:

Those seem to consist of:

• AI Virtue of Prudence: AI Ethics precepts entailing System 1 thinking, implicit biases, in-group favoritism, self-serving biases, value-action gaps, moral disengagement, etc.
• AI Virtue of Fortitude: AI Ethics precepts entailing situational forces, peer influences, authorities, etc.

The rationale or basis for these two second-order AI Virtues is partially based on this notion: “While both virtues may help to overcome bounded ethicality, they are at the same time enablers for living up to the basic virtues. Individual psychological biases as well as situational forces can get in the way of acting justly, honestly, responsibly or caringly. Prudence and fortitude are the answers to the many forces that may restrict basic AI virtues, where prudence is aiming primarily at individual factors, while fortitude addresses supra-individual issues that can impair ethical decision making in AI research and development” (ibid).

All told, if I can try to recap the proposed set of AI Virtues, they are this:

• យុត្តិធម៍
• ភាពស្មោះត្រង់
• ការទទួលខុសត្រូវ
• ការថែរក្សា
• ប្រុងប្រយ័ត្ន (second-order)
• ភាពក្លាហាន (second-order)

Which generally tend to consist of this coupling with AI Ethics rules or principles:

• AI Virtue of Justice: AI Ethics precepts include algorithmic fairness, non-discrimination, bias mitigation, inclusion, equality, diversity, etc.
• AI Virtue of Honesty: AI Ethics precepts include transparency, openness, explainability, interpretability, technological disclosure, open source, acknowledge errors and mistakes, etc.
• AI Virtue of Responsibility: AI Ethics precepts include responsibility, liability, accountability, replicability, legality, accuracy, considering long-term technological consequences, etc.
• AI Virtue of Care: AI Ethics precepts include non-maleficence, harm, safety, privacy, protection, precaution, hidden costs, beneficence, well-being, sustainability, peace, common good, solidarity, social cohesion, freedom, autonomy, liberty, consent, etc.
• AI Virtue of Prudence (second-order): AI Ethics precepts entailing System 1 thinking, implicit biases, in-group favoritism, self-serving biases, value-action gaps, moral disengagement, etc.
• AI Virtue of Fortitude (second-order): AI Ethics precepts entailing situational forces, peer influences, authorities, etc.

A spirited debate over all of this is easy to be prodded into action.

I’m sure that some of you right now are already going berserk over one or another of the proffered AI Virtues. It’s not a virtue, some might be yelling. It is not adequately worded some of you might be crying out. Quite a shouting match could arise.

Amidst the various anticipated criticism and qualms that the research explores, one that seems to me especially notable has to do with the classic agent-centered versus act-centered issues involved. The agent-centric viewpoint is basically that we want an agent or actor to be of a certain mind, while the act-centric viewpoint tends to focus on the actions that are undertaken.

Perhaps, some would say, AI Virtues are more so about the agency or agent-centric aspects, while AI Ethics is more so about the act-centric constituents. We want AI developers and AI systems to be rooted in AI Virtues as a type of “mindset” (programming in the case of the AI), and the acts of the AI developers and the acts of the AI are represented via the Ethical AI precepts.

There is also the danger that some will misrepresent this as though the use of AI Virtues implies that AI will never do any wrong. Or perhaps we will get bogged down in devising AI Virtues and meanwhile lose sight of AI Ethics principles or rules. Plenty of motivations can be conjured to undercut the AI Virtues as a framework that either doesn’t do much good or worse so distracts and confounds the work that a displaced commentator might holler really needs to be done instead.

សន្និដ្ឋាន

Do we need AI Virtues?

And, if so, will they be of use and warmly embraced by those already steeped in AI Ethics, or might AI Virtues be seen as duplicative, a false decoy, an annoying distraction, or otherwise portrayed as something alluring but an unsuitable splintering of already overwhelmed efforts to get Ethical AI into the minds and hands of companies devising and using AI.

Many AI Ethics advocates already are overtaxed as to getting business leaders to listen and getting AI adopters to seriously consider Ethical AI precepts (for my coverage of AI Ethics Boards, see តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ, and for analysis of worker burnout for those carrying the banner of Ethical AI, see តំណភ្ជាប់នៅទីនេះ). You can envision that a common reaction to AI Virtues would be that the plate is already full of AI Ethics rules, thus, let’s get those fully consumed before we venture into the stratosphere of AI Virtues.

A counterargument is that we inadvertently skipped over or neglected to go to basics. AI Virtues should have long ago been laid out. Though we cannot turn back the clock, we can try to make up for the lost time. The same mighty mechanizations over AI Ethics can certainly absorb the belated inclusion of AI Virtues.

Get to it, stop complaining.

Friedrich Nietzsche said: “We do not place special value on the possession of a virtue until we notice its total absence in our opponent.” You might then agree that the advent of អាយអេសសម្រាប់អាក្រក់ has sparked not only our realization of the need for AI Ethics but has also likewise (or ought to have) stoked our appetite for and possible acceptance of AI Virtues too.

The last word on this goes to Marcus Tullius Cicero, Roman statesman, for which he reportedly exclaimed: “The enemy is within the gates; it is with our own luxury, our own folly, our own criminality that we have to contend.” You see, the vices are already within the gates of AI, and we might need to up our attention to virtues to counteract the rising tide of evils.

AI Virtues are waiting patiently but persistently at the gates.