Unintended Consequences of Living with AI: The Paradox of Technological Potential?Part II [Guest Editorial]

Abstract

In November 2015, as editors, we started sorting through submissions for a special collection of articles examining the paradox of technological potential. Separately, we published a call to the public at large, asking “What comes to mind, when you think about technology, and unintended consequences?” Then using a smart phone, we documented handwritten responses from people whose paths we crossed, collecting submissions from individuals in both hemispheres. While geographically the contributors could not have been further apart, psychologically, their responses echoed one another in a resonant, prescient way. In this way we were able to physically capture the thoughts of a variety of participants, and share them with our co-editors across the globe in near real time thanks to the marvels of technology. Simultaneously, the responses we gathered noted some recurring and challenging concerns. We heard concerns about time, presence, and disconnection. Many of these responses have been archived in a photographic collection [1]. Unanticipated consequences is a sociological concept emphasized by Robert K. Merton [2]. Although later writers have interchanged the notion of unintended consequences with unanticipated consequences, the two phrases are subtly but significantly different, despite being deeply connected [3]. In general, unintended consequences refer to those not intended by a purposeful action. Unanticipated consequences are those with outcomes that were not those that were foreseen. It follows then that an unintended consequence might/might not have been anticipated (Table 1). It is also important to state that unintended consequences can have positive, negative,or even perverse [4] impacts on individuals, groups of people, or society at large (Figure 1).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.