Abstract:The 17 July special section on Artificial Intelligence (AI) (p. [248][1]), although replete with solid information and ethical concern, was biased toward optimism about the technology. The articles concentrated on the roles that the military and government play in “advancing” AI, but did not include the opinions of any political scientists or technology policy scholars trained to think about the unintended (and negative) consequences of governmental steering of technology. The interview with Stuart Russell touches on these concerns (“Fears of an AI pioneer,” J. Bohannon, News, p. [252][2]), but as a computer scientist, his solutions focus on improved training. Yet even the best training will not protect against market or military incentives to stay ahead of competitors. Likewise double-edged was M. I. Jordan and T. M. Mitchell's desire “that society begin now to consider how to maximize” the benefits of AI as a transformative technology (“Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects,” Reviews, p. [255][3]). Given the grievous shortcomings of national governance and the even weaker capacities of the international system, it is dangerous to invest heavily in AI without political processes in place that allow those who support and oppose the technology to engage in a fair debate. The section implied that we are all engaged in a common endeavor, when in fact AI is dominated by a relative handful of mostly male, mostly white and east Asian, mostly young, mostly affluent, highly educated technoscientists and entrepreneurs and their affluent customers. A majority of humanity is on the outside looking in, and it is past time for those working on AI to be frank about it. The rhetoric was also loaded with positive terms. AI presents a risk of real harm, and any serious analysis of its potential future would do well to unflinchingly acknowledge that fact. The question posed in the collection's introduction—“How will we ensure that the rise of the machines is entirely under human control?” (“Rise of the machines,” J. Stajic et al. , p. [248][1])—is the wrong question to ask. There are no institutions adequate to “ensure” it. There are no procedures by which all humans can take part in the decision process. The more important question is this: Should we slow the pace of AI research and applications until a majority of people, representing the world's diversity, can play a meaningful role in the deliberations? Until that question is part of the debate, there is no debate worth having. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.349.6245.248 [2]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.349.6245.252 [3]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aaa8415

Are skepticism and moderation dominating attitudes toward AI‐based technologies?

Misalignments in AI Perception: Quantitative Findings and Visual Mapping of How Experts and the Public Differ in Expectations and Risks, Benefits, and Value Judgments

Public Opinion toward Artificial Intelligence

Public Perception of AI: Sentiment and Opportunity

Dissociation Between Users’ Explicit and Implicit Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence: An Experimental Study

Mapping Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence: Expectations, Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs, and Value As Determinants for Societal Acceptance

"Happy and Assured that life will be easy 10years from now.": Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in 8 Countries

Perceptions and Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence: A Multi-Dimensional Study

What does the public think about artificial intelligence?—A criticality map to understand bias in the public perception of AI

The influence of AI Anxiety and Neuroticism in Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence

AI Consciousness and Public Perceptions: Four Futures

Acknowledging AI's Dark Side

Perceptions of the Impact of High-Level-Machine-Intelligence from University Students in Taiwan: The Case for Human Professions, Autonomous Vehicles, and Smart Homes

Exploring the artificial intelligence "Trust paradox": Evidence from a survey experiment in the United States

AI Perceptions Across Cultures: Similarities and Differences in Expectations, Risks, Benefits, Tradeoffs, and Value in Germany and China

WHERE IN SOCIETY WILL AI AGENTS FIT? A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING ATTITUDES TOWARD AI OCCUPATIONAL ROLES FROM THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES OF STATUS, IDENTITY, AND ONTOLOGY

Everyday artificial intelligence unveiled: Societal awareness of technological transformation

Fears about artificial intelligence across 20 countries and six domains of application

The impact of human-AI collaboration types on consumer evaluation and usage intention: a perspective of responsibility attribution

Adopting AI: How Familiarity Breeds Both Trust and Contempt

AI as a boss? A national US survey of predispositions governing comfort with expanded AI roles in society