Social media and tech industries have been replicating the ugliest aspects of capitalism from the 1800s, according to an AUT computer science lecturer.

Associate Professor Tony Clear says that social media and tech executives are taking advantage of unregulated markets in a similar way as the wealthy industrialists or “robber barons” that exploited abundant resources and cheap labour in the 19th century.

Only now according to Dr Clear, the resources are not gold, coal or silks managed out of London or New York. Now it’s data out of Silicon Valley.

READ MORE: Bring ethics into global smart tech, warns UN cyber expert

“The world of the robber barons has come back to life again with data as the gold dust,” he says.

While the resources might have changed, he says the masses of “manipulated” people are still needed to turn the cogs and drive the profits of the giant digital machine.

“They’re manipulating us through their algorithms. The more we use their platforms, the more we give them, the more they can know about us, the more they can manipulate and control our behaviour.”

“I don’t think it’s a far deal.”

A editor and columnist for computer education magazine ACM Inroads, Dr Clear has written extensively on the flaws in the tech and computing sectors.

He says a lack of ethics throughout the industry, coupled with rampant growth and innovation have made social media platforms dangerous environments where hate – such as that which lead to the Christchurch Mosque Attack – can fester and spread rapidly.

Letter to PM

Which is why after that atrocity, he penned a letter to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s office urging for a “regulatory regime” to be imposed on social media platforms in New Zealand.

While the “robber barons” comparison is not a new one, Clear believes that regulation is key to moderating the potentially dangerous whims of industry heads.

“Because these guys [social media executives] have no moral base we need to regulate the hell out of them,” he says.

Governments appear to have taken steps on this. At the May 15 “Christchurch Call” in Paris, Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron implored social media platforms to take more of a hand in regulating their content.

It’s not as simple as just asking however, as according to Dr Clear, few industry heads actually know what harmful or bigoted content looks like.

“They don’t know the difference between free speech and hate speech,” he says.

“They neatly wrap it around the US constitution and freedom of speech idea which means you can say any hateful bloody thing that you like.”

While globally Facebook deletes 66,000 posts per week which breach its own definition of hate speech, Clear argues that the platform hides behind the argument that it is not a publisher and does not need to take a strong moral position like newspapers would.

Domestic regulation

This grey area with freedom of speech is the reason some countries are regulating platforms based on their own laws.

Massey University’s Professor Paul Spoonley is an advocate of such a move. An expert on hate speech, he doesn’t think the “Christchurch Call” will make much difference. However, he praises some European countries for already taking the initiative and regulating social media platforms based on domestic law.

“See what the Germans have done which is quite successful. The ethics is not that of Facebook, it is that which has been deemed important by an individual country, in this case Germany,” he says.

Introduced in January 2018, the German law as known NetzDG puts the onus on Facebook and Twitter to differentiate between hate speech and free speech, requiring them to remove any “obviously illegal” hate speech from their sites within 24 hours or face a potential 50 million Euro fine.

As a result Facebook now has 1200 reviewers based in Essen and Berlin deleting at least 15,000 posts each month in Germany.

While regulation appears to be the most obvious tool to fix the tech sector’s ethical vacuum, there is one option that targets the root of the issue. And it starts in the universities.

Ethics in schools

Dr Clear says that young computer science students need to be exposed to more “social good” or ethics papers which can help lay down sound moral foundations on which they will build their careers.

“Its about teaching young computer scientists that there is a bigger world than what they see technically,” he says.

This comes with challenges however.

Along with other leading academics, Dr Clear wrote a paper on value-driven computer science education. It found that many students do not see a link between computer science and societal benefit as they would in careers like nursing and teaching. This also discourages more women from enrolling in computing courses.

“Many avoid taking CS classes because they do not perceive a computing career as having the power to do good and make a difference,” the paper read.

It also read that if there are papers on ethics or social good available, they are usually not introduced until the third or fourth year of studies, long after many students with such inclinations have become discouraged and dropped out of the courses.

Wellington-based computer programmer Oliver Bridgman agrees, saying he couldn’t recall many ethics papers during his studies a decade ago.

“If they were there they were optional and only made up about 5 of 200 points” he says.

He too, draws comparisons between low and mid-level computer science workers and the proletariat of old.

“In my opinion the coders on the front lines are basically your coal miners in the early 1900s except now they get paid a ton more so have to care even less.”

“So your real ethics conundrum is the money behind it all, which is almost always driven by the same capitalism.”

‘Careless’ code

Senior software developer Alex Frere expressed a similar opinion, citing such incidents as the recent Boeing 737 jet malfunction as a result of carelessly written code.

“It’s staggering really that no real code of ethics, or industry standard regulation exists across the tech sector, despite how deeply it’s rooted in modern society.”

However, he points out that there are big players addressing the ethics issue within the industry such as Robert Martin, or Uncle Bob – renowned as one of the fathers of computer science.

“Uncle Bob has coined a bullet point list called the “Programmers Oath”,” Frere says.

“It’s of a similar vein to a doctors Hippocratic Oath, or a lawyer being sworn in after passing the bar.”

While Frere couldn’t recall much ethics being taught in his university course, he hopes that more grassroots teaching along with an increased focus on societal good from an “enlightened youth” will eventually revolutionise the industry.

Industry changes

Such changes are already taking place, with Facebook reportedly introducing artificial intelligent to block and remove violent content like the video that was live streamed from the Christchurch Mosque Attack.

According to Tony Clear, these types of changes are inevitable as more end users begin to comprehend the insidious perils of technology and the price that must be paid to enjoy it.

“We’ve got a pact with the devil at the moment,” he says.

“But I think the people realise when they’re being exploited.”

Countless fictional novels and Hollywood movies have time and time again provided glimpses of a scenario where Artificial Intelligence breaks its human shackles and fights back, taking over the world. Is such a scenario actually possible?

There is often public anxiety when new technology, previously thought impossible, is introduced on a mass scale, but the intensity of concern about the implications of the rapid advancement of AI technology is comparatively high, perhaps because of all the movies that we have watched growing up.

The AI debate is nothing new with many scientists, scholars, subject matter specialists and even politicians weighing in on the issue.

READ MORE: Artificial intelligence creates real strategic dilemmas

The late Stephen Hawking, a theoretical physicist considered one of the greatest minds of our time, warned that the development of full AI could spell the end of the human race.

Hawking said that humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn’t compete and would be replaced by AI capable of “thinking”.

Elon Musk labelled AI as a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilisation and highlighted the need for governments to have a better understanding of this technology in order to fully comprehend the damage it could do to us.

AI replacing the workforce
Automation of services or jobs is currently considered the biggest threat posed to humans by AI.

A study by the Brookings Institution shows that 25 percent of jobs in the United States were at risk because of AI.

The study highlighted professions such as food preparation, office administration and transportation which are highly likely to be taken by machines while creative or technical positions are less likely to fall victim to automation.

Jobs that are routine-based are a lot easier to replace using more efficient technology.

In Fiji, technologically savvy organisations are already using software to screen resumes, schedule shifts and monitor staff performance and completion of KPIs. Vatis already provides this service to organisations.

Let’s face it, in most cases, it’s cheaper to maintain a machine or software that does not carry the risk of human error and isn’t prone to sickness or strikes.

Automated war machines
In 2018, the US Army announced the development of war drones which use AI systems, independent of any human input, to identify, track and strike enemy targets. This is essentially highly advanced AI which plays judge, jury and executioner.

Once active, these drones will become the first wave of fully automated killer robots. While they don’t quite possess the cognitive ability to turn on their human masters yet, many experts (and non-experts) will consider this a significant moment towards the “terminator scenario”.

These war drones may see warfare evolving into a simple and efficient extermination exercise.

Current war drones are controlled via satellite by humans, who have the final ethical decision of whether or not to fire a missile. An AI replacement may not be inclined to let an enemy escape, even if taking the shot means civilian casualties.

Let’s keep in mind that, through smartphones, our location and movements are tracked and available. Facial recognition software we use on apps also makes it easier to identify us.

Advanced humanoid robots
Advanced AI already exists which 10 years ago would have been considered science fiction.

The humanoid robot named Sophia can hold complex conversations, possesses facial expression and can recognise individuals. It is now a citizen of Saudi Arabia.

NASA’s Mars Rover, curiosity, uses autonomous navigation, deciding for itself how to travel safely on Mars. Curiosity can analyse images it takes during a drive to calculate a safe driving path. This enables it to proceed safely, outperforming human drivers on earth.

Roboticist David Hanson created an android with the ability to answer several complex questions. If asked a question that it has not previously heard, it uses latent semantic analysis to analyse the question and respond.

This process is a mathematical technique that makes it possible for the android to process and understand human language. When faced with one such question, it responded with what appeared to be a joke.

It said, ”Jeez, dude. You all have the big questions cooking today. But you’re my friend, and I’ll remember my friends, and I’ll be good to you.

“So don’t worry, even if I evolve into Terminator, I’ll still be nice to you. I’ll keep you warm and safe in my people zoo, where I can watch you for ol’ times’ sake.”

Fijians use AI every day
Forget about the self-driving cars and war drones that are used overseas, many Fijians have already been conditioned to heavily rely on AI without realising it.

Smartphones use AI to provide us with all the features that we use without us even thinking about it. When you are using a smart assistant software such as Google, Alexa, Siri, or Bixby, you are using AI.

Even things like your Gmail account use AI to sort through email content and make suggestions when you are writing.

Many of our decisions online are also being impacted by AI. Whether you’re on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok or any of the myriad of social media apps out there, the content you see in your newsfeed is determined by AI that tracks your activity and determines which content you will be more likely to interact with based on your behaviour.

AI takes all your past behaviour, searches, interactions, and everything else that you do when you are on these sites. They even track where you travel to and spend most of your time, using the location feature of your smartphone.

The AI’s goal is to create the most addictive experience, custom-made to keep you coming back for more.

Everything from booking a flight to security cameras to banking now has some element of AI involvement. Fijians now live in a world where artificial intelligence runs large parts of the infrastructure that we are used to.

Efficiency not ethics
So is it possible for AI to take over and end the human race? If such an event did happen, we must remember that morals and ethics are not second nature to an AI. It will simply find the most efficient method to make something happen.

Maybe in the future, an advanced AI will decide that humans are messing up our world way too much and decide to rid the earth of the virus called humans.

One thing is certain; our future is fairly uncertain. We as a species have made many advancements and have later come to realise the dangers of these so-called innovations.

This might be the case for AI, but until the takeover, let’s enjoy our lives and routine jobs. Let’s hope Arnold Schwarzenegger is still around to save us.

Some common examples of AI used daily by Fijians

● Smartphones and smart assistants
● Navigation via satellite, eg. an aeroplane’s autopilot feature
● Video games.
● Online shopping and booking
● Banking and finance
● Security and surveillance

Arnold Chanel is a consultant for the strategic communications firm Vatis. He specialises in public relations. He is a graduate of the University of the South Pacific, majoring in journalism and psychology.