arXiv preprint ·
What Do We Mean When We Say 'F*ck AI'?: Moral Panic, Semantic Indeterminacy, and the Reification of Techno-Capitalism
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Academic and (increasingly) public resistance to artificial intelligence (AI) often blurs the line between legitimate critique of techno-capitalist exploitation and (inflated) existential risk. Moreover, discourse around AI can sometimes resemble a "moral panic" where an apparently clear and identifiable scapegoat is targeted in lieu of the complex systemic problems that are causing (genuine and justified) social anxieties. However, AI is not a monolith. In this paper, we explore the environmental, political, and socio-technical consequences of the semantic indeterminacy of discourse about "AI" in conjunction with the increasing moral panic encompassing these technologies. We argue that since the umbrella term "AI" lacks a coherent, singular referent, the moral panic about AI inadvertently reifies the concept of an autonomous, singular agent with inherent and often autonomous tendencies, which aligns with corporate narratives. Hence, well-intentioned critique, activist pushback, and public protest paradoxically amplifies hype-based discussions of AI, thus validating the "threat" narrative that tech leaders deploy to exaggerate their products' capabilities and market value, further consolidating and centralising their political and socio-economic power. Moreover, if "AI" does not refer to a unified class of technologies, then policy intended to govern "AI" will systematically (and necessarily) fail. We conclude by proposing ways forward to improve AI literacy, enforce accountability, and repurpose existing regulation in order to imagine a more positive AI future.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computers & Society
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
Sure Enough to Share? Overconfidence in GenAI Video Discernment is Associated with Sharing Intentions
Palimpsestic Accountability in the US Federal AI Inventories
Thick Alignment: A Social Framework for Values and AI Systems
From Guidelines to Practice: Defining Requirements for AI Red-Teaming Tools
Get the few papers worth your time in Computers & Society every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.