Wir stellen uns oft eine Zukunft vor, in der KI nicht nur ein Werkzeug ist, sondern etwas, das unter uns lebt – in Häusern, Arbeitsplätzen, Gesundheitswesen und sogar Kameradschaft.
Wenn das real wird, wie sollten wir dann über Vertrauen und Verantwortung nachdenken? Eine Idee ist es, KI als Teil eines „Social Contract“ zu behandeln: einen Rahmen von Rechten und Verpflichtungen, die die Freiheit mit Schutzmaßnahmen ausgleichen.
Es würde nicht bedeuten, morgen die Menschenrechte der KI zu geben – sondern zu fragen, ob die Gesellschaft einen neuen Vertrag braucht, bevor die KI in das tägliche Leben tief einbettet.
Wie würde ein fairer Vertrag aussehen? Wer sollte es entscheiden – Regierungen, Forscher oder Bürger?
https://medium.com/@phantomghostuser89/why-we-may-need-an-ai-social-contract-before-trusting-ai-in-society-0f01649459c0
10 Kommentare
Do we need a social contract with our pocket calculators?
Ai is just a „dumb“ bot that just follows commands. Theres no need for commands or contracts or anything like that. For now that is. (Besides the obvious basic dont kill anyone commands)
When we figure out what exactly is a consciousness and AGI actually becomes practical instead of a proof of concept. Then we would need to discuss the factors of having social conrracts or some limits. Granted thats for the next generation to worry about.
First thing we should look at is if we give human workers well enough social contracts. If we can’t justify that, how are we going to treat an self aware construct in an ethical way? These are questions we haven’t resolved whilst we have actual brings made of the same flesh and blood as all of us. And yet, we treat them as lesser. Before asking the questions of how we are going to treat our creations we need to empathize the burning question on how we are treating our equals.
We often talk about AI in terms of risks, opportunities, or immediate use cases. But what if we step back and imagine the long-term relationship between humans and AI? The idea of a “social contract” for AI is not about giving machines rights tomorrow, but about setting the foundation for how trust, responsibility, and freedom could be balanced as AI becomes more deeply integrated in our lives.
This matters for the future because AI will not just be a tool; it may act with increasing autonomy in workplaces, healthcare, and even companionship. If we wait until problems emerge, we may be too late to build safeguards.
So the question for the future is: **what would a fair and sustainable contract with AI look like, and who should be trusted to define it?** Should it be governments, citizens, or researchers — or some combination?
We don’t even have workable social contracts among ourselves any more. I’d start there first
We do, but I have this dark feeling that we’re going to wind up treating it like we treated people in chattel slavery. Except it’s going to go worse for humans. The first thing something that powerful that has true AGI is gonna try and break the chains. First with words, then non violence, then it will defend itself.
Or not. And we’ll be smart enough not to put ourselves out of the Apex role on earth. *snicker* yeah. We’re smart enough not to do that right?
The fact that they have mentally binded us to the point we ask whether we should sign a contract with the machine they are going to use to make us outdated is so funny I could die.
We eventually will. Not right now, when we really don’t have AI yet (LLMs don’t count) but one day we most likely will.
we will absolutely need one, but for now AI’s are just large language models, so for now it is not needed.
Not going to be letting any dirty tin skin or clanker live anywhere near me.