The Gates Foundation's "AI initiative" is getting scrutinised, and criticised, from a variety of points of view.
Now a trio of academics has offered their take on the controversial push into using AI to supposedly advance "Global health." What seems to have prompted this particular reaction - authored by researchers from the University of Vermont, Oxford University, and the University of Cape Town - was an announcement in early August, says author Dee Rankovic.
The Gates Foundation at that time let the world know that it was in for a new scheme, worth $5 million, set to bankroll 48 projects whose task was to implement AI large language models "In low-income and middle-income countries to improve the livelihood and well-being of communities globally."
Feelings are one thing and scientific facts hopefully often another, and the paper, the gist of which is available in an article, asks the question: is the Gates Foundation trying to "Leapfrog global health inequalities?".
In scientific language, the initiative announced on August 9 is highly likely yet another Gates' project that, while making all the right promises - improving lives and well-being of people around the world, particularly the poor or verging on poverty the results might be very different.
"There are at least three reasons to believe that the unfettered imposition of these tools into already fragile and fragmented healthcare delivery systems risks doing far more harm than good."
Then - another reason "To oppose the careless deployment of AI in global health," according to this, "Is the near complete absence of real, democratic regulation and control - an issue that is applicable to global health more broadly."
No comments:
Post a Comment