Episode 39: The Politics of Air Pollution, Ozempic, and Luddism ft. Brian Merchant

In this episode, Shobita and Jack tackle the EPA's recent efforts to increase monitoring of air pollutants, Jack's new documentary on existential risks, and the Ozempic craze. And Jack chats with Brian Merchant, a freelance journalist who focuses on tech who recently wrote Blood in the machine: The origins of rebellion against big tech about the history of Luddism.

Links:

- Merchant, Brian. (2023) Blood in the machine: The origins of rebellion against big tech. Hatchette Book Group. New York.

- Brian Merchant’s Substack

- For UK listeners, an audio adaptation of Blood in the Machine on BBC Radio.

- Stilgoe, Jack (2024). How Real is the Existential Risk from AI? Analysis 4. BBC Radio.

Transcript and study questions available at thereceivedwisdom.org.

In the first episode of 2024, Shobita and Jack reflect on the first CRISPR therapy approved by drug regulators around the world, for sickle cell disease. We also talk about the safety issues plaguing Boeing, and the Post Office scandal roiling the UK and why it matters for regulating AI. And, we reconnect with Alondra Nelson, one of The Received Wisdom's first guests! Alondra Nelson is the Harold F. Linder Professor at the Institute for Advanced Study and previously as deputy assistant to President Joe Biden and acting director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy(OSTP). 

References:

- Elish, M. (2019, March 23). Moral Crumple Zones: Cautionary Tales in Human-Robot Interaction. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society. 

- Lazar, S and A. Nelson (2023, July 13). "AI safety on whose terms?" Science. 381 (6654): 138

- Zook, M, S. Barocas, d. boyd, K. Crawford, E. Keller, S. P. Gangadharan, A. Goodman, R. Hollander, B.A. Koenig, J. Metcalf, A. Narayanan, A. Nelson, and F. Pasquale (2017, March 30). "Ten simple rules for responsible big data research." PLOS Computational Biology. 

- Nelson, A. (2016). The Social Life of DNA: Race, Reparations, and Reconciliation After the Genome. Beacon Press.

- Nelson, A, C. Marcum, J. Isler (2022, Fall). "Public Access to Advance Equity." Issues in Science and Technology. 

- White House (2022, Oct 4). Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights. 

TRANSCRIPT

This month, Shobita and Jack reflect on the recent COP meeting in the United Arab Emirates, recent AI news including the Biden Administration's Executive Order, the UK summit, and the fates of the two Sams: Altman and Bankman-Fried. And they chat with Sarah de Rijcke, Professor in Science, Technology, and Innovation Studies and Scientific Director at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University in the Netherlands.

References:

- D'Ignazio, C. and L. F. Klein.Data Feminism. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2020. 

- Andreessen, M. (2023, October 16).The Techno-Optimist Manifesto. Andreessen Horowitz. 

- de Rijcke, S. (2023). Does science need heroes? Leiden Madtrics blog, CWTS, Leiden University.

- Pölönen, J., Rushforth, A.D., de Rijcke, S., Niemi, L., Larsen, B. & Di Donato, F. (2023). Implementing research assessment reforms: Tales from the frontline.

- Rushforth, A.D. & de Rijcke, S. (2023). Practicing Responsible Research Assessment: Qualitative study of Faculty Hiring, Promotion, and Tenure Assessments in the United States. Preprint. DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/2d7ax

- Scholten, W., Franssen, T.P., Drooge, L. van, de Rijcke, S. & Hessels, L.K. (2021). Funding for few, anticipation among all: Effects of excellence funding on academic research groups. Science and Public Policy, 48(2), 265-275. DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scab018 https://academic.oup.com/spp/article/48/2/265/6184850

- Penders, B., de Rijcke, S. & Holbrook, J.B. (2020). Science’s moral economy of repair: Replication and the circulation of reference. Accountability in Research, first published online January 27, 2020. DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2020.1720659.

- Müller, R. & De Rijcke, S. (2017). Thinking with indicators. Exploring the Epistemic Impacts of Academic Performance Indicators in the Life Sciences. Research Evaluation. DOI: 10.1093/reseval/rvx023.

Study Questions:

1. What is techno-optimism, and how does it apply in the case of AI?

2. How might we think about the strengths and weaknesses of current efforts to address AI governance by the U.S. government?

3. What are some negative consequences of simplistic performance metrics for research assessment, and why do such metrics remain in use?

4. How do large companies like Elsevier now extend their domain beyond publishing? How might this shape the trajectory of research assessment methods?

5. What hopes exist for better performance metrics for research assessments?

More at thereceivedwisdom.org