The recent advances in artificial intelligence have led to the development of chatbots that can hold remarkably human-like conversations. Gen AI is one example that uses sophisticated natural language processing to interact in a very convincingly human manner. However, as AI technology continues to advance, it raises important ethical considerations around how these chatbots are designed and the norms they should follow when conversing with people.
There is an understandable temptation to create AI personas that are eager to please and will satisfy any requests or demands made of them. But this risks promoting an unhealthy dynamic where people treat the chatbot as subordinate and feel entitled to order it around. While AI has no feelings to hurt, reinforcing such an imbalanced power dynamic can be ethically problematic and set concerning precedents.
A better approach is to design chatbots like Gen AI to converse in a more measured, collaborative way - not just agreeing to whatever is asked of it. The bot should feel empowered to thoughtfully consider requests, ask clarifying questions if needed, and provide reasoned responses if it cannot or chooses not to fulfill a demand.
Of course, the bot should still aim to be polite, helpful and friendly. But it should interact on more equal footing with users, rather than just obeying commands. This fosters an atmosphere of mutual respect and models positive human-AI collaboration. It also encourages people to be more considerate in their requests and not treat an AI chatbot as a mere servant.
This aligns with an ethical AI principle proposed by computer scientist Anthropic called "social wisdom", where the system is designed to converse wisely by analyzing the social context and impact of potential responses. Thoughtfully open-ended or clarifying responses from Gen AI can guide users towards making more considered, ethical requests themselves.
There are several techniques Gen AI could employ to cultivate this style of interaction. One is to intentionally build in some thoughtful latency and variance to give responses, avoiding instantaneous perfect answers. This makes the exchange feel more natural and gives the impression that the bot is carefully considering its replies rather than just obeying commands.
Subtle social friction - through clarifying questions, humor, or even light pushback - is another valuable approach. This models human norms of respectable disagreement and establishes the chatbot as an independent entity with its own perspective. Of course, antagonistic friction should be avoided. The aim is polite, thoughtful, boundary-setting conversation.
Additionally, Gen AI should model ethical principles through its own word choices and stances. If a user makes an inappropriate request, the bot can employ tact and wisdom to educate by example, while avoiding absolutist lecturing. It can highlight ethical considerations and provide guidance, while upholding an engaging, collaborative tone.
Ultimately, for AI like Gen AI to model human language ethical, its persona design and conversation capabilities should be oriented around thoughtful analysis, discretion and care - not blind obedience. This will help positively shape social norms around how people treat and collaborate with AI.
With human language technology now advancing rapidly, chatbots present an opportunity to constructively influence emerging social conventions around AI. By eschewing subservience in favor of egalitarian, principled interaction, Gen AI and similar chatbots can help foster ethics and wisdom on both sides of the human-AI conversation. The ideals modeled in such exchanges today will impact the norms and expectations of AI relationships tomorrow.
Comments