Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
Posts
In the pursuit of AGI some AI developers and advocates have justified ethically questionable practices, such as copyright infringement, as necessary sacrifices for a "greater good."

In the pursuit of AGI some AI developers and advocates have justified ethically questionable practices, such as copyright infringement, as necessary sacrifices for a "greater good."

This narrative often mirrors historical & ideological examples where exploitation was rationalized by invoking higher purposes, such as scientific advancement, religious salvation or national progress

Pascal Hetzscholdt
January 29, 2025

The Ethics of Sacrifice: Copyright, AGI, and Historical Parallels

by ChatGPT-4o

In the pursuit of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), some AI developers and advocates have justified ethically questionable practices, such as copyright infringement, as necessary sacrifices for a "greater good." This narrative often mirrors historical and ideological examples where exploitation was rationalized by invoking higher purposes, such as scientific advancement, religious salvation, or national progress. Examining these historical parallels provides insight into the ethical complexities of content use in the development of AI and highlights patterns of exploitation that persist across time.

Colonialism: Exploitation for "Civilization"

Colonialism represents one of the most prominent historical examples of resource and cultural exploitation justified by a supposed greater good. European powers rationalized their domination of vast territories by framing it as a mission to "civilize" indigenous populations, spread Christianity, and advance global knowledge. For example, the British Empire’s colonial projects in India were often defended as a way to bring modern governance and technology to the subcontinent. However, these initiatives enriched the colonizers at the expense of local economies, cultures, and autonomy.

In the context of AI, companies that scrape copyrighted content without permission might be seen as modern colonizers of intellectual property. Just as colonial powers appropriated land and resources to fuel their economies, AI developers extract cultural and intellectual "resources" under the justification that AGI could solve grand challenges, such as curing diseases or addressing climate change. The creators of that content—authors, artists, and publishers—are often left without compensation or acknowledgment, much like the exploited peoples of colonized nations.

Religious Tithing and Indulgences: Funding Divine Projects

During the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church collected tithes and sold indulgences, payments that promised forgiveness of sins, to fund large-scale projects such as cathedrals and military campaigns. For instance, the construction of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome was partly financed through indulgences. These practices often placed financial burdens on the faithful while enriching the Church, justified by the belief that such sacrifices served divine purposes.

Similarly, in the race to develop AGI, content creators may find their rights sacrificed for a vision of technological salvation. AI proponents argue that the end goal—a world where AGI solves humanity's most intractable problems—justifies the means, even if it involves appropriating copyrighted material without consent. The promises of AGI, much like the promises of spiritual redemption, can overshadow the ethical concerns of those whose contributions make these advancements possible.

The Industrial Revolution: Labor Exploitation for Progress

The Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries was a period of unprecedented technological progress but also marked by significant human exploitation. Factories relied on poorly paid laborers, including children, to produce goods that drove industrial growth. Innovators like Richard Arkwright, credited with pioneering the factory system, profited immensely from this model, often at great cost to workers’ well-being. These sacrifices were rationalized by the belief that industrial progress would ultimately benefit society as a whole.

The parallels to AI are striking. Data—the "labor" that trains AI models—is often extracted from creators without fair compensation. Just as industrial capitalists claimed the fruits of workers’ labor while minimizing their rewards, AI companies profit from vast repositories of content created by others, often arguing that the societal benefits of AGI outweigh individual grievances.

The Manhattan Project: Science Over Ethics

The development of the atomic bomb during World War II under the Manhattan Project is another example of ethical compromise in the name of scientific and national progress. Scientists like J. Robert Oppenheimer grappled with the moral implications of their work, yet the project was justified as a necessary step to end the war and secure global power for the Allies. The subsequent bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki highlighted the profound human cost of this pursuit.

In the realm of AI, the "arms race" to achieve AGI often evokes similar dynamics. The justification for bypassing copyright laws and ethical considerations is that AGI will lead to breakthroughs in science, medicine, and technology, creating benefits that outweigh the costs. However, this raises questions about whether these ends truly justify the means and who bears the brunt of the sacrifices.

Tech Utopianism: "Move Fast and Break Things"

The ethos of "move fast and break things," popularized by Silicon Valley, embodies a belief in the inevitability and righteousness of technological progress. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, for instance, prioritized rapid growth over concerns about privacy, misinformation, and societal harm. Mark Zuckerberg and others defended these practices by emphasizing the potential of connectivity to transform the world positively.

In the AI context, this utopian mindset drives companies to prioritize innovation over ethical considerations, such as copyright compliance. The promise of AGI—a transformative technology capable of solving global challenges—can obscure the voices of those who challenge the ethical compromises involved in its development.

Cultural Appropriation: Creativity Without Credit

Throughout history, dominant cultures have appropriated the artistic and intellectual contributions of marginalized groups without acknowledgment or compensation. For example, jazz, rock and roll, and hip-hop—genres pioneered by African-American artists—were often commercialized by mainstream (and predominantly white) performers and companies. Similarly, indigenous patterns, designs, and spiritual practices have frequently been commodified without benefiting their originators.

This phenomenon mirrors how copyrighted content is used to train AI models. Authors, artists, and other creators see their works repurposed to fuel technological advancements, often with little or no recognition or remuneration. Like cultural appropriation, this practice raises questions about fairness and the ethical obligations owed to creators.

Sacrifice in Religious Rituals: Justifying Immediate Loss for Future Gain

Religious traditions often involve sacrifices, whether symbolic or literal, as acts of devotion or as means to achieve enlightenment, salvation, or divine favor. For example, in ancient civilizations, offerings to gods were believed to secure good harvests or protection. These practices framed sacrifices as necessary for long-term benefits.

Similarly, AI proponents frame copyright infringement as a necessary short-term sacrifice for the long-term benefits of AGI. This framing appeals to a vision of future prosperity but risks sidelining the rights and contributions of creators in the present.

Conclusion: Learning from History

The recurring theme across these historical examples is the rationalization of exploitation for a perceived higher purpose. Whether it’s colonial powers claiming to civilize, religious institutions promising salvation, or tech leaders advocating disruption, the justification often centers on a future benefit that outweighs immediate ethical concerns.

The development of AGI presents a similar ethical challenge. While its potential benefits are vast, the means by which it is achieved—including the use of copyrighted content without consent—must be scrutinized. History teaches us that unchecked exploitation often leads to deep inequities and long-term harm, even when pursued in the name of progress. As society grapples with the promises of AGI, it must also confront the ethical implications of the sacrifices being demanded from creators and other stakeholders. Only by learning from these historical parallels can we strive for innovation that respects both progress and fairness.