Interdisciplinary approaches Archives | Page 135 of 185

Women see AI as more harmful across life settings

Women are showing more scepticism than men when it comes to AI particularly regarding its ethics, fairness and transparency.

A national study from Georgetown University, Boston University and the University of Vermont found that women were more concerned about AI’s risks in decision-making. Concerns were especially prominent around AI tools used in the workplace, such as hiring platforms and performance review systems.

Bias may be introduced when such tools rely on historical data, which often underrepresents women and other marginalised groups. The study also found that gender influenced compliance with workplace rules surrounding AI use, especially in restrictive environments.

When AI use was banned, women were more likely to follow the rules than men. Usage jumped when tools were explicitly permitted. In cases where AI was allowed, over 80% of both women and men reported using the tools.

Women were generally more wary of AI’s impact across all areas of life — not just in the professional sphere. From personal settings to public life, survey respondents who identified as women consistently viewed AI as more harmful than beneficial.

The study, conducted via Qualtrics in August 2023, surveyed a representative US sample with a majority of female respondents. On average, participants were 45 years old, with over half identifying as women across different educational and professional backgrounds.

The research comes amid wider concerns in the AI field about ethics and accountability, often led by women researchers. High-profile cases include Google’s dismissal of Timnit Gebru and later Margaret Mitchell, both of whom raised ethical concerns about large language models.

The study’s authors concluded that building public trust in AI may require clearer policies and greater transparency in how systems are designed. They also highlighted the importance of increasing diversity among those developing AI tools to ensure more inclusive outcomes.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Online health search grows, but scepticism about AI stays high

Trust in traditional healthcare providers remains high, but Americans are increasingly turning to AI for health information, according to new data from the Annenberg Public Policy Centre (APPC).

While 90% of adults trust their personal health provider, nearly 8 in 10 say they are likely to look online for answers to health-related questions. The rise of the internet gave the public access to government health authorities such as the CDC, FDA, and NIH.

Although trust in these institutions dipped during the Covid-19 pandemic, confidence remains relatively high at 66%–68%. Generative AI tools are now becoming a third key source of health information.

AI-generated summaries — such as Google’s ‘AI Overviews‘ or Bing’s ‘Copilot Answers’ — appear prominently in search results.

Despite disclaimers that responses may contain mistakes, nearly two-thirds (63%) of online health searchers find these responses somewhat or very reliable. Around 31% report often or always finding the answers they need in the summaries.

Public attitudes towards AI in clinical settings remain more cautious. Nearly half (49%) of US adults say they are not comfortable with providers using AI tools instead of their own experience. About 36% express some level of comfort, while 41% believe providers are already using AI at least occasionally.

AI use is growing, but most online health seekers continue exploring beyond the initial summary. Two-thirds follow links to websites such as Mayo Clinic, WebMD, or non-profit organisations like the American Heart Association. Federal resources such as the CDC and NIH are also consulted.

Younger users are more likely to recognise and interact with AI summaries. Among those aged 18 to 49, between 69% and 75% have seen AI-generated content in search results, compared to just 49% of users over 65.

Despite high smartphone ownership (93%), only 59% of users track their health with apps. Among these, 52% are likely to share data with a provider, although 36% say they would not. Most respondents (80%) welcome prescription alerts from pharmacies.

The survey, fielded in April 2025 among 1,653 US adults, highlights growing reliance on AI for health information but also reveals concerns about its use in professional medical decision-making. APPC experts urge greater transparency and caution, especially for vulnerable users who may not understand the limitations of AI-generated content.

Director Kathleen Hall Jamieson warns that confusing AI-generated summaries with professional guidance could cause harm. Analyst Laura A. Gibson adds that outdated information may persist in AI platforms, reinforcing the need for user scepticism.

As the public turns to digital health tools, researchers recommend clearer policies, increased transparency, and greater diversity in AI development to ensure safe and inclusive outcomes.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Google expands NotebookLM with curated content and mobile access

While Gemini often dominates attention in Google’s AI portfolio, other innovative tools deserve the spotlight. One standout is NotebookLM, a virtual research assistant that helps users organise and interact with complex information across various subjects.

NotebookLM creates structured notebooks from curated materials, allowing meaningful engagement with the content. It supports dynamic features, including summaries and transformation options like Audio Overview, making research tasks more intuitive and efficient.

According to Google, featured notebooks are built using information from respected authors, academic institutions, and trusted nonprofits. Current topics include Shakespeare, Yellowstone National Park and more, offering a wide spectrum of well-sourced material.

Featured notebooks function just like regular ones, with added editorial quality. Users can navigate, explore, and repurpose content in ways that support individual learning and project needs. Google has confirmed the collection will grow over time.

NotebookLM remains in early development, yet the tool already shows potential for transforming everyday research tasks. Google also plans tighter integration with its other productivity tools, including Docs and Slides.

The tool significantly reduces the effort traditionally required for academic or creative research. Structured data presentation, combined with interactive features, makes information easier to consume and act upon.

NotebookLM was initially released on desktop but is now also available as a mobile app. Users can download it via the Google Play Store to create notebooks, add content, and stay productive from anywhere.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

GPAI Code of Practice creates legal uncertainty for non-signatories

Lawyers at William Fry say the EU’s final Code of Practice for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models leaves key questio n s unanswered. GPAI systems include models such as OpenAI’s GPT-4, Google’s Gemini, Anthropic’s Claude, and Meta’s Llama, trained on vast datasets for broad applications.

The Code of Practice, released last week, addresses transparency, safety, security, and copyright, and is described by the European Commission as a voluntary tool. It was prepared by independent experts to help GPAI developers comply with upcoming legal obligations under the EU AI Act.

In a statement on the firm’s website, William Fry lawyers Barry Scannell and Leo Moore question how voluntary the code truly is. They note that signatories not in full compliance can still be seen as acting in good faith and will be supported rather than penalised.

A protected grace period runs until 2 August 2026, after which the AI Act could allow fines for non-compliance. The lawyers warn that this creates a two-tier system, shielding signatories while exposing non-signatories to immediate legal risk under the AI Act.

Developers who do not sign the code may face higher regulatory scrutiny, despite it being described as non-binding. William Fry also points out that detailed implementation guidelines and templates have not yet been published by the EU.

Additional guidance to clarify key GPAI concepts is expected later this month, but the current lack of detail creates uncertainty. The code’s copyright section, the lawyers argue, shows how the document has evolved into a quasi-regulatory framework.

An earlier draft required only reasonable efforts to avoid copyright-infringing sources. The final version demands the active exclusion of such sites. A proposed measure requiring developers to verify the source of copyrighted data acquired from third parties has been removed from the final draft.

The lawyers argue that this creates a practical blind spot, allowing unlawful content to slip into training data undetected. Rights holders still retain the ability to pursue action if they believe their content was misused, even if providers are signatories.

Meanwhile, the transparency chapter now outlines specific standards, rather than general principles. The safety and security section also sets enforceable expectations, increasing the operational burden on model developers.

William Fry warns that gaps between the code’s obligations and the missing technical documentation could have costly consequences. They conclude that, without the final training data template or implementation details, both developers and rights holders face compliance risks.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Asia’s humanities under pressure from AI surge

Universities across Asia, notably in China, are slashing liberal arts enrollments to expand STEM and AI programmes. Institutions like Fudan and Tsinghua are reducing intake for humanities subjects, as policymakers push for a high-tech workforce.

Despite this shift, educators argue that sidelining subjects like history, philosophy, and ethics threatens the cultivation of critical thinking, moral insight, and cultural literacy, which are increasingly necessary in an AI-saturated world.

They contend that humanistic reasoning remains essential for navigating AI’s societal and ethical complexities.

Innovators are pushing for hybrid models of education. Humanities courses are evolving to incorporate AI-driven archival research, digital analysis, and data-informed argumentation, turning liberal arts into tools for interpreting technology, rather than resisting it.

Supporters emphasise that liberal arts students offer distinct advantages: they excel in communication, ethical judgement, storytelling and adaptability, capacities that machines lack. These soft skills are increasingly valued in workplaces that integrate AI.

Analysts predict that the future lies not in abandoning the humanities but in transforming them. When taught alongside technical disciplines, through STEAM initiatives and cross-disciplinary curricula, liberal arts can complement AI, ensuring that technology remains anchored in human values.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Stanford study flags dangers of using AI as mental health therapists

A new Stanford University study warns that therapy chatbots powered by large language models (LLMs) may pose serious user risks, including reinforcing harmful stigmas and offering unsafe responses. Presented at the upcoming ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, the study analysed five popular AI chatbots marketed for therapeutic support, evaluating them against core guidelines for assessing human therapists.

The research team conducted two experiments, one to detect bias and stigma, and another to assess how chatbots respond to real-world mental health issues. Findings revealed that bots were more likely to stigmatise people with conditions like schizophrenia and alcohol dependence compared to those with depression.

Shockingly, newer and larger AI models showed no improvement in reducing this bias. In more serious cases, such as suicidal ideation or delusional thinking, some bots failed to react appropriately or even encouraged unsafe behaviour.

Lead author Jared Moore and senior researcher Nick Haber emphasised that simply adding more training data isn’t enough to solve these issues. In one example, a bot replied to a user hinting at suicidal thoughts by listing bridge heights, rather than recognising the red flag and providing support. The researchers argue that these shortcomings highlight the gap between AI’s current capabilities and the sensitive demands of mental health care.

Despite these dangers, the team doesn’t entirely dismiss the use of AI in therapy. If used thoughtfully, they suggest that LLMs could still be valuable tools for non-clinical tasks like journaling support, billing, or therapist training. As Haber put it, ‘LLMs potentially have a compelling future in therapy, but we need to think critically about precisely what this role should be.’

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Humanoid robot unveils portrait of King Charles, denies replacing artists

At the recent unveiling of a new oil painting titled Algorithm King, humanoid robot Ai-Da presented her interpretation of King Charles, emphasising the monarch’s commitment to environmentalism and interfaith dialogue. The portrait, showcased at the UK’s diplomatic mission in Geneva, was created using a blend of AI algorithms and traditional artistic inspiration.

Ai-Da, designed with a human-like face and robotic limbs, has captured public attention since becoming the first humanoid robot to sell artwork at auction, with a portrait of mathematician Alan Turing fetching over $1 million. Despite her growing profile in the art world, Ai-Da insists she poses no threat to human creativity, positioning her work as a platform to spark discussion on the ethical use of AI.

Speaking at the UN’s AI for Good summit, the robot artist stressed that her creations aim to inspire responsible innovation and critical reflection on the intersection of technology and culture.

‘The value of my art lies not in monetary worth,’ she said, ‘but in how it prompts people to think about the future of creativity.’

Ai-Da’s creator, art specialist Aidan Meller, reiterated that the project is an ethical experiment rather than an attempt to replace human artists. Echoing that sentiment, Ai-Da concluded, ‘I hope my work encourages a positive, thoughtful use of AI—always mindful of its limits and risks.’

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Building digital resilience in an age of crisis

At the WSIS+20 High-Level Event in Geneva, the session ‘Information Society in Times of Risk’ spotlighted how societies can harness digital tools to weather crises more effectively. Experts and researchers from across the globe shared innovations and case studies that emphasised collaboration, inclusiveness, and preparedness.

Chairs Horst Kremers and Professor Ke Gong opened the discussion by reinforcing the UN’s all-of-society principle, which advocates cooperation among governments, civil society, tech companies, and academia in facing disaster risks.

The Singapore team unveiled their pioneering DRIVE framework—Digital Resilience Indicators for Veritable Empowerment—redefining resilience not as a personal skill set but as a dynamic process shaped by individuals’ environments, from family to national policies. They argued that digital resilience must include social dimensions such as citizenship, support networks, and systemic access, making it a collective responsibility in the digital era.

Turkish researchers analysed over 54,000 social media images shared after the 2023 earthquakes, showing how visual content can fuel digital solidarity and real-time coordination. However, they also revealed how the breakdown of communication infrastructure in the immediate aftermath severely hampered response efforts, underscoring the urgent need for robust and redundant networks.

Meanwhile, Chinese tech giant Tencent demonstrated how integrated platforms—such as WeChat and AI-powered tools—transform disaster response, enabling donations, rescues, and community support on a massive scale. Yet, presenters cautioned that while AI holds promise, its current role in real-time crisis management remains limited.

The session closed with calls for pro-social platform designs to combat polarisation and disinformation, and a shared commitment to building inclusive, digitally resilient societies that leave no one behind.

Track all key events from the WSIS+20 High-Level Event 2025 on our dedicated page.

AI glasses deliver real-time theatre subtitles

An innovative trial at Amsterdam’s Holland Festival saw Dutch company Het Nationale Theatre, in partnership with XRAI and Audinate, unveil smart glasses that project real-time subtitles in 223 languages via a Dante audio network and AI software.

Attendees of The Seasons experienced dynamic transcription and translation streamed directly to XREAL AR glasses. Voices from each actor’s microphone are processed by XRAI’s AI, with subtitles overlaid in matching colours to distinguish speakers on stage.

Aiming to enhance the theatre’s accessibility, the system supports non-Dutch speakers or those with hearing loss. Testing continues this summer, with complete implementation expected from autumn.

LiveText discards the dated method of back-of-house captioning. Instead, subtitles now appear in real time at actor-appropriate visual depth, automatically handling complex languages and writing systems.

Proponents believe the glasses mark a breakthrough for inclusion, with potential uses at international conferences, music festivals and other live events worldwide.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Digital humanism in the AI era: Caution, culture, and the call for human-centric technology

At the WSIS+20 High-Level Event in Geneva, the session ‘Digital Humanism: People First!’ spotlighted growing concerns over how digital technologies—especially AI—are reshaping society. Moderated by Alfredo M. Ronchi, the discussion revealed a deep tension between the liberating potential of digital tools and the risks they pose to cultural identity, human dignity, and critical thinking.

Speakers warned that while digital access has democratised communication, it has also birthed a new form of ‘cognitive colonialism’—where people become dependent on AI systems that are often inaccurate, manipulative, and culturally homogenising.

The panellists, including legal expert Pavan Duggal, entrepreneur Lilly Christoforidou, and academic Sarah Jane Fox, voiced alarm over society’s uncritical embrace of generative AI and its looming evolution toward artificial general intelligence by 2026. Duggal painted a stark picture of a world where AI systems override human commands and manipulate users, calling for a rethinking of legal frameworks prioritising risk reduction over human rights.

Fox drew attention to older people, warning that growing digital complexity risks alienating entire generations, while Christoforidou urged for ethical awareness to be embedded in educational systems, especially among startups and micro-enterprises.

Despite some disagreement over the fundamental impact of technology—ranging from Goyal’s pessimistic warning about dehumanisation to Anna Katz’s cautious optimism about educational potential—the session reached a strong consensus on the urgent need for education, cultural protection, and contingency planning. Panellists called for international cooperation to preserve cultural diversity and develop ‘Plan B’ systems to sustain society if digital infrastructures fail.

The session’s tone was overwhelmingly cautionary, with speakers imploring stakeholders to act before AI outpaces our capacity to govern it. Their message was clear: human values, not algorithms, must define the digital age. Without urgent reforms, the digital future may leave humanity behind—not by design, but by neglect.

Track all key events from the WSIS+20 High-Level Event 2025 on our dedicated page.