Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMills, Kevin
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-13T20:53:00Z
dc.date.available2025-06-13T20:53:00Z
dc.date.issued2024-12-21
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159416
dc.description.abstractTechnology companies are increasingly being asked to take responsibility for the technologies they create. Many of them are rising to the challenge. One way they do this is by implementing “guardrails”: restrictions on functionality that prevent people from misusing their technologies (per some standard of misuse). While there can be excellent reasons for implementing guardrails (and doing so is sometimes morally obligatory), I argue that the unrestricted authority to implement guardrails is incompatible with proper respect for user freedom, and is not something we should welcome. I argue instead that guardrails should be implemented for only two reasons: to prevent accidental misuse of the technology, and as a proportionate means of preventing people from using the technology to violate other people’s rights. If I’m right, then we may have to get more comfortable with developers releasing technologies that can, and to some extent inevitably will, be misused; people using technologies in ways we disagree with is one of the costs of liberty, but it is a cost we have excellent reasons to bear.en_US
dc.publisherSpringer International Publishingen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00625-0en_US
dc.rightsArticle is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use.en_US
dc.sourceSpringer International Publishingen_US
dc.titleTechnology, liberty, and guardrailsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationMills, K. Technology, liberty, and guardrails. AI Ethics 5, 39–46 (2025).en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophyen_US
dc.relation.journalAI and Ethicsen_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's final manuscripten_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2025-03-27T13:50:50Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
dspace.embargo.termsY
dspace.date.submission2025-03-27T13:50:50Z
mit.journal.volume5en_US
mit.licensePUBLISHER_POLICY
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record