The cautious optimist in AI/AS will be confident regarding the future of machines (hard or soft), but will be ready, if not expectant, that there will be difficulties, failures, and even human rights abuses along the way. The centrist view admits to a middle way that is neither utopic or dystopic, where all things are possible but not necessarily probable, and where humans might well get it right some of the time, but not all the time. The hype may be predicting the end of the world as we know it, вЂњas autonomous systems make decisions to send in the drones indiscriminately,вЂќ while others herald a vision of an augmented human existence where sustainability is present in all facets of life, the removal of вЂњheavy liftingвЂќ for all individuals, and peace on earth to focus on all the right things through collective awareness.

Yet serious research especially from those with engineering and information and communications technology (ICT) backgrounds, alongside ethicists and end-users has been severely lacking. We are bombarded with media hype about hopes for, and harms of, intelligent and complex systems, big data analytics and machine learning, robotics, and artificial intelligence, hyper-automation, and the human versus machine debate. This editorial provides examples of AI/AS applications and service offerings, examining the potential for embedding ethics in the design process to minimize end-user vulnerability. In fact, what we have today is a plethora of idealistic design principles that draw from the domain of ethics, that at times the very organizations and agencies that created them struggle to put into practice.

Institutes, corporations, governments, each with their imperatives, are rushing to make claims about their practices. There seems to be no end to the development of principles and guidelines in the artificial intelligence/autonomous systems (AI/AS) discipline.

Phillips hue ambify