To give female academics and others focused on AI their well-deserved and overdue spotlight time, TechCrunch is launching a series of interviews highlighting notable women who have contributed to the AI revolution. Start. As the AI boom continues, we'll be publishing several articles throughout the year highlighting key research that may go unrecognized. Click here for a detailed profile.
Amba Kak is executive director of the AI Now Institute, where she helps develop policy recommendations to address AI concerns. She is also a senior AI advisor at the Federal Trade Commission, where she previously worked as a global policy advisor at Mozilla and as general counsel on networks for India's telecom regulator.
In short, how did you get started in AI? What attracted you to this field?
This is not a simple question, as “AI” is a popular term to describe practices and systems that have evolved over time.I've been working on technology policy for over 10 years. and in multiple regions of the world And we witnessed a time when everything was about “big data” and then everything became about “AI”. But the core question we were concerned about hasn't changed: how data-driven technologies and economies will impact society.
I was drawn to these questions early on when I entered law school in India. There, I felt motivated to work in a field where questions were “pre-policy” – what kind of normative questions were being asked, amidst a sea of precedents spanning decades and even centuries. Is that the world we want? What role should technology play in this? Be open-ended and open to dissent. At the time, there was a huge debate around the world over whether the internet could be regulated at a national level (though it seems like a given now!), and in India there was a heated debate over whether to introduce a biometric ID database. There was a discussion. The whole nation was creating a dangerous vector of social control. In the face of the narrative of inevitability surrounding AI and technology, regulation and advocacy have become powerful tools for shaping the trajectory of technology that serves the public interest, rather than corporate interests or simply those with social power. I think I will get it. . Of course, over the years I have found that regulation is often fully exploited by these interests, and in many cases can function more to maintain the status quo than to challenge it. I also learned that. That's the job!
What work (in the AI field) are you most proud of?
Our 2023 AI Landscape report was released in April at the height of chatGPT-powered AI buzz. It was part diagnosis of what keeps us up at night about the AI economy, and part of an action-oriented manifesto for the broader civil society community. . It came at a moment when both diagnosis and what to do about it were sorely lacking, and instead a narrative about the omnipotence and inevitability of AI emerged. We highlighted that the AI boom is further concentrating power in very narrow areas of the tech industry. And I think we've done a good job of punching through the hype and redirecting attention to the impact of AI on society and the economy…and we didn't envision something like this. This was inevitable.
Later this year, we had the pleasure of raising this argument in front of a room full of government leaders and top AI executives at the UK AI Safety Summit. There I was his one of only three civil society voices representing the public interest. This was a lesson in recognizing the power of compelling, counter-narratives that command attention again at a time when we tend to get swept away by the tech industry's cherry-picked, self-serving narratives.
I'm also really proud of a lot of the work that I did during my tenure as the Federal Trade Commission's senior advisor on AI, addressing emerging technology issues and some of the major enforcement actions in that area. . It was a great team to be a part of. He also learned the important lesson that just being in the right room at the right time can influence policy decisions.
How do we overcome the challenges of a male-dominated tech industry and, by extension, a male-dominated AI industry?
The tech industry, especially the AI industry, remains overwhelmingly white, male, and geographically concentrated in very wealthy urban bubbles. But I am moving away from the AI white problem not only because it is now well known, but also because it can sometimes create the illusion of stopgap solutions and diversity theater. Yes, because on its own it will not solve the structural inequalities and power imbalances embedded in how AI works. The tech industry is up and running right now. It does not solve the deep-rooted “solutionism” that is responsible for many harmful or exploitative uses of technology.
The real problem we need to address is the creation of a small group of companies, within which they have amassed unprecedented access to capital, networks and power, and reaped the benefits of the surveillance business model that has driven society. The goal is to create a small number of individuals who are His last 10 years on the internet. And this concentration of power is likely to be exacerbated by AI. These individuals act with impunity despite the enormous social and economic impacts of the platforms and infrastructure they control.
How do we navigate this? By exposing the power relationships that the tech industry tries so hard to hide. We discuss the incentives, infrastructure, labor markets, and environment that are driving these technology waves and shaping their direction. This is what we have been working on for nearly a decade at AI Now, and if we do this well, it will be difficult for policymakers and the public to look away, and to challenge counter-narratives and counter-narratives about the appropriate role of technology. An alternative imagination is generated. in society.
What advice would you give to women looking to enter the AI field?
The best advice I can give, not only for women but also for other minority identities and perspectives looking to critique from outside the AI industry, is to stand up for yourself. This is a field that routinely and systematically attempts to discredit criticism, especially when it comes from people who don't traditionally come from her STEM background. It's easy to do so, considering AI is a very opaque industry and it feels like they're always trying to push it. Just returned from outside. Even if you've been in this field for decades like me, powerful voices in the industry will try to undermine you and your legitimate criticism just because you're challenging the status quo. will do.
You and I have as much say in the future of AI as Sam Altman, because AI technologies affect us all and can disproportionately impact people with potentially underrepresented minority identities. I have the right. Right now, we're in the middle of a fight over who gets to claim expertise and authority on technology issues within society…so we really need to claim that territory and hold our ground. there is.