Technology should advance along ethical lines

A friend sent me a creative message during the Spring Festival that was a clever rewrite of a poem.

In spite of its apparent lack of coherence, I was touched to see my name embedded in the lines, until I was told that this was the work of Doubao, an AI tool created by ByteDance.

While these are probably fun things to do during festivals, giving AI a "poetic" license doesn't mean it can be used in other areas where it could cause confusion.

Take the recent example of an article attributed to the founder of DeepSeek that went viral in social media and tech circles.

It turned out that DeepSeek put it together at the request of a user of Zhihu, a Quora-like platform purporting to have answers for all questions.

It might have been a Frankenstein moment if we can afford a few minutes of reflection: how easily an application could produce an "article" and the huge social cost of clearing up the confusion.

The asymmetry only points to the urgency of having an effective regulatory regime in place in terms of crime and punishment.

Given the recent excitement surrounding the brave new world of AI, there is an added need to remind us of the ultimate purpose of science and technology, namely the betterment of human society, as well as the dangers of a post-truth dystopia in which it is no longer simple to tell the truth from the falsehoods.

For your information, we have yet to address the perennial issue of unsolicited phone calls, the plight of deliverymen trapped in the void of algorithm, or the deluge of "breaking" news that constantly competes for our attention by reducing us to mental junk.

Our sage advised us to proceed slowly and softly if we were unsure of our destination. In Confucius' Analects, when a disciple-official asked the Master for advice on good governance, Confucius replied, "Do not rush things, for hurrying things is self-defeating."

Or worse.

For example, there have been reports of researchers falsifying research data using tools designed to facilitate research, as well as cases of research papers being created by AI tools, and we can expect more of the same unless the wrongdoers are held accountable for their dishonesty.

There are also blurry areas where ambitious but unscrupulous researchers try to establish a name for themselves in the uncharted sea of genetic editing, such as by interfering with human reproductive cells.

Early this year, in Beijing, a draft regulatory framework for stronger ethical governance in science and technology was released. It made clear references to the ethical use of AI and put the strictest limits on experiments using human reproductive cells or brain-computer interfaces that are implanted.

That is a worthwhile endeavor that should be emulated elsewhere.

When we are not yet confident in dealing with potential risks, we should act safely and fast.