THIS IS AN AMENDED VERSION OF AN ARTICLE ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED BY THE CARNEGIE COUNCIL FOR ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. SEE THE ORIGINAL AT WWW.CARNEGIECOUNCIL.ORG1
Shoshana Zuboff, the author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,3 also uses this lens to explore power in the Information Age, asking (and answering): Who knows? (surveillance capitalist corporations); Who decides? (the market); and Who decides who decide? (surveillance capitalists).
In the development, use, and purchasing of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, it is important to ask questions about who holds power, what conversations we are—and are not—having, and who is directing these conversations.
Who is deciding who the decisionmakers are? Who runs and finances the high-profile events that set the narrative? Who controls the frames of reference, deciding what pieces are—and are not—placed on the board to begin with?
As Meredith Whittaker argues in her essay The steep cost of capture,4 the major tech companies largely determine what work is—and is not—conducted on AI, by dominating both academia and the various panels initiated by international organisations or governments to advise on AI research priorities.
A culture has developed in which those who speak up against the prevailing narratives risk getting defunded orpaper on the diversity crisis facing the entire AI ecosystem describing the current state of the field as "alarming."5
