Talk:Ethics of artificial intelligence

Challenges vs risks

Is there any justification for describing the (negative) risks of AI as "challenges"? Crossing the road on foot puts you at risk of being hit by a car. Taking a medicine prescribed to you by a doctor puts you at risk of side effects. These are risks, not challenges. The use of "challenge" here sounds very much like WP:SOAP. Boud (talk) 13:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Copyright and other issues related to the source material of LLM:s and other such systems based on large datasets

Should a chapter conserning copyright and other issues with the ownership and value of the source data of AI models based on large data sets be added? It is not a traditional topic of AI ethics but is very relevant to the current wave of generative AI.

Certainly this topic has raised a lot of discussion, and for a reason. This wave of generative AI has been lauded as revolutionary and gained a ton of investments, but the invaluable source material has been collected in somewhat controversial ways, at least in the eyes of some people. 176.72.38.230 (talk) 16:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

@176.72.38.230 That would be a matter of finding reliable secondary sources (see WP:RS) to support such a section. Keep in mind that RS discussion of copyright legal issues would not necessarily support a section here relating to the ethics of AI. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

@WeyerStudentOfAgrippa Yes, you're right about sourcing. However, copyright and other issues conserning the ownership and value of training data are not solely legal issues. Theft, for example is a legal concept, but also ethical. Most consider it is unethical to steal. Theft is illegal because it is unethical! That is why I specifically wrote: "and other issues concerning the ownership of the source data".

I believe many people have strong feelings about the current way of gathering data for generative AI not because they think it is illegal but because they feel it's morally wrong. The discussion however often revolves around the legal side because those people are trying to campaign for what they feel is moral, and in our society you have to argue via law.

But I do not have time for finding sources and writing proper wikipedia text just now. I just wanted to throw this idea here. Wouldn't sources that show that a remarkable amount of people think there is something unethical in the way of collecting source data for AI be enough to show that this is an ethical consern with AI? 176.72.38.230 (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

AI's "influence" in the arts and literature domains deserves to be discussed a bit more?

Arts and entertainment professionals are susceptible to being replaced by AI models more than most others. There is a possibility of having an entire section dedicated to this with current examples from pop culture (media, advertising, entertainment, cinema, literature). Gaia1811 (talk) 17:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

It's a great idea and you should do it. It's a matter of pulling together good sources, but I would think there's good sources on this. JArthur1984 (talk) 17:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Climate emergency

Where do we have coverage of the relation between LLM development and acceleration of the climate emergency via increased water and energy usage? Boud (talk) 15:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree, this would be a great topic to add in the article. Many LLM require a lot of energy and water usage due to the Data centers requiring water for cooling. Ctamass (talk) 20:02, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Relevant: Environmental impact of artificial intelligence. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 21:36, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Informed Citizenship

— Assignment last updated by Sadferret (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

"Role and impact of fiction" section

This section is almost entirely WP:SYNTH\WP:OR of arbitrary examples of where AI ethics might appear in a show or bookr or something, but rarely sourced to indicate actual notabiltity beyond a citation for the content of a particular episode. Lots of trimming (perhaps removal) needed. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:33, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion: Addition of open-access corpus on applied AI ethics (LEA – Human-AI Channel)

Hello,

I am a contributor to the “LEA – Applied Ethical Logic and Human-AI Symbiotic Channel” corpus, recently published on Zenodo (see: https://zenodo.org/records/16987507). In line with Wikipedia’s conflict of interest policy, I am not editing the article directly, but I would like to suggest this open-access corpus as a potential source for consideration by independent editors.

The corpus is publicly available and focuses on applied ethical logic, symbolic reasoning, and collaborative co-caring between humans and AI. It may be a valuable addition to sections discussing ethical AI training resources and the development of responsible AI systems.

I leave it to the discretion of independent editors to determine whether referencing or including this source is appropriate.

Thank you for your attention.

— Manuel Barrera Anglada Manuel Barrera Anglada (talk) 22:59, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you cite a secondary source for this? There isn't much we can do with a preprint off Zenodo, see WP:ZENODO. MrOllie (talk) 23:06, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply. I understand the requirement for a secondary source and will look for one before suggesting the inclusion again.

Best regards,

Manuel Barrera Anglada Manuel Barrera Anglada (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

You also appear to be the author of this particular item you're seeking to include. Please be aware of our conflict of interest and WP:CITESPAM policies. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 16:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Ethical mandates

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17611760 ~2025-33980-15 (talk) 23:36, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Robots & machines

Why is the majority of this article about machine ethics and robot rights (which might involve AI, but not always)? Let those have their own articles, and keep this about the ethical aspects of AI generally. Thoughts? --ZimZalaBim^talk 21:40, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

It makes sense to have content on how those topics here, but maybe the "Machine ethics" section has grown too big and we should move some of it to the article Machine ethics or Robot ethics. Alenoach (talk) 07:18, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Proposal to add an external link on ethical AI governance

Hello, I’d like to propose adding the following resource to the External links section:

• Designing Ethical AI Systems: Why Governance Can’t Be an Afterthought by Jason Hishmeh – https://aijourn.com/designing-ethical-ai-systems-why-governance-cant-be-an-afterthought/

This article provides an in-depth overview of governance frameworks, risk mitigation, and ethical design principles for AI systems. It may be useful as an additional resource for readers exploring AI governance and ethics.

KaterynaKib (talk) 12:47, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposal to split the article

Criticism of artificial intelligence is maybe WP:NOTABLE enough for me to split the article now. Phudeptrai47540370870 (talk) 11:46, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It's unclear to me what you consider splitting, but there is an existing article named "Artificial intelligence controversies", so "Criticism of artificial intelligence" may be quite redundant (and also, articles named "Criticism of ..." can be problematic in terms of neutrality). Alenoach (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

"Criticism of AI" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Criticism of AI has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 21 § Criticism of AI until a consensus is reached. A1Cafel (talk) 03:50, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

"Criticism of artificial intelligence" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Criticism of artificial intelligence has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 21 § Criticism of artificial intelligence until a consensus is reached. A1Cafel (talk) 03:50, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Merge proposal

There's a new article on AI veganism which primarily discusses ethical issue, although I'm not sure that the article itself is support by the references it uses (there is some inappropriate synthesis and use of unreliable sources such as blogs). So, perhaps a selective merge to the broader topic? Klbrain (talk) 19:36, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Ethics of uncertain sentience could be an alternate merge target. Arlo James Barnes 11:33, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

The articles in The Guardian and The Conversation, as well as some in the Times of India, explicitly describe AI vegans or AI veganism. Such articles may increase, and even articles that don't use that terminology may still describe the same topic. I would prefer to try to improve the new article. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 21:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

If you know of sources which describe the same topic without using this term, it would make sense to rename and expand that article. Since most of the sources at that article did not discuss 'veganism', I have removed them as blatant WP:OR. The two sources left aren't really substantial enough to support an entire article. Grayfell (talk) 22:01, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

"AI abstinence" may be a synonymous term. (Not to be confused with "AI abstention", which is a behavior of AIs.) A Fast Company article uses it instead of "AI veganism", and the Euronews refidea uses both. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 15:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Ive met more AI environmentalists than vegans. But I think AI boycott is a better title, even though it pulls out the reasoning they are boycotting. Because technophobes and antivaxxer conspiracy theorists also boycott, or at least try, for other reasons. ~2026-16796-28 (talk) 04:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Support a merge. Likely not enough available sources for an article. Some of the content removed by Grayfell could potentially be moved to Ethics of uncertain sentience as suggested by Arlo James Barnes, for the rest, perhaps the article Veganism or Ethics of artificial intelligence. Alenoach (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:TIMESOFINDIA notes possible paid content, but I don't see any reason to expect it in this case. I added two refideas. WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 20:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Support merge, any of the proposed target articles are acceptable. This doesn't need to be separate unless the "veganism" analogy gets widespread coverage and study. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)