# data[].attributes.body
The information within this clip is relevant to the assertions that this documentary is based

http://ez1.maricopa.edu:2048/login?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/ihuman/clips/159425

# data[].attributes.body
Multiple interviewees converge on the same solution, the problem is stated and a complication with this solution is brought up.

http://ez1.maricopa.edu:2048/login?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/ihuman/clips/159428

# data[].attributes.body
Czech Politician Věra Jourová speaks about how AI could expedite genocide.

http://ez1.maricopa.edu:2048/login?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/ihuman/clips/159427

# data[].attributes.body
This clip sets the precedent for the main topics of the film.

http://ez1.maricopa.edu:2048/login?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/ihuman/clips/159420

# data[].attributes.headline
Element of Critical Thinking: POINT OF VIEW

# data[].attributes.subject
Element of Critical Thinking: POINT OF VIEW

# data[].attributes.body
Synopsis:

The documentary combines convergent points of view from the interviewees. The format of the documentary switches from montage to interviews with the interviewees acting as the narrator. Their role as a narrator is to disseminate and plainly explain information. This amalgamation of information is presented from a holistic perspective of an expert. The documentary instills a sense of dread by making the problem of AI more relatable as it speaks to the implications on the individual as well on society as a whole. The documentary presents the issue of artificial intelligence as an imminent threat and expects the audience to act on the information as a call for action to regulate AI. Throughout the film most of the camera angles are face on, only deviating from this format to signify the importance of a topic. An example of this deviation is this pseudo-subplot that follows the evolution of an amorphous cybernetic blob whose development is interspersed in the film, usually immediately following the explanation of a major point. Making iHuman’s allegory of artificial intelligence appear oppressive. The face on camera angles are used to demonstrate the humanity of the interviewees, and makes their worries more sympathetic.

Research:

This article was able to shed light on the efficacy of documentary style filmmaking as a tool for social awareness and change. Authors Caty Chattoo and Angelica Das claim that documentaries are effective in instigating discussions about issues that society and populations face. Though the documentary might not have the goal of actually making an impact, so long as the issue gains awareness it prompts some towards these effective discussions. Though most of the article is about tools of analysis for researchers in studying the effectiveness of a documentary it is based on the notion that documentaries are tools of change. “In some cases, just getting audiences to see the film, connect with the story and better understand an issue is enough. This awareness is the first step to social change” (Chattoo and Das par. 20). The article substantiates the idea that documentaries have power in their ability to create social change and awareness.

Citation:

Chattoo, Caty, and Angelica Das. “Assessing the Social Impact of Issues-Focused Documentaries: Research Methods & Future Considerations.” Center for Media and Social Impact, American University, Oct. 2014, cmsimpact.org/resource/assessing-the-social-impact-of-issues-focused-documentaries-research-methods-future-considerations/.

# data[].attributes.headline
Element of Critical Thinking: INTERPRETATION  & INFERENCE

# data[].attributes.subject
Element of Critical Thinking: INTERPRETATION  & INFERENCE

# data[].attributes.body
Synopsis:

The documentary informally asks you to reimagine your preconceptions about artificial intelligence and shows you the perils of its use. Through the examples iHuman submits to the viewer they learn about AI’s use in China to surveil the population and implement “social credit” in which algorithms identify potential dissidents and those who are most likely to conform to the standard set by the state. The message of skeptical optimism about artificial intelligence is important to someone who uses the internet everyday, as we create more data that could potentially be used to exploit our behaviors. Others may view this documentary as a piece of science fiction, people who might think of AI as incorruptible could interpret the documentary as reprehensible. Those novice in AI, are likely to interpret iHuman as I did. The director of iHuman, Tonje Hessen Schei is a Norwegian filmmaker who also directed the award winning documentary Drone (2014). She initiated interest in the issue of artificial intelligence through preliminary investigation for Drone by researching the relationship between the entertainment industry and the military. Through that research Schei found that weapons are increasingly more reliant on this technology.

Research:

There is a paucity of information surrounding the filmmaker of iHuman. What I could find out about her was from a video interview about the documentary. This video source allows me to support the inference I had made concerning the inspiration for the documentary. In the interview, director Tonje Hessen Schei informs the interviewer that it was the research for her last documentary Drone that prompted further investigation into integration of artificial intelligence within the military. Also, I feel compelled to mention that I did reach out to the director to get some more information and to my surprise I actually got a response. Since Schei lives in Norway and has a busy schedule with the European release of the documentary and meeting with AI regulators in Scotland we couldn’t schedule a time to talk. How unfortunate.

Citation:

La Porta, Domenico. Industry Talks - Tonje Hessen Schei • Director. Cineurope.org, 2019, cineuropa.org/en/video/372988/?fbclid=IwAR1CCV24T-DgqL4XDFfD5cbZKXkKs5ZHmNT5V_5iqR9KeOkmRimZv0Fa1f0.

# data[].attributes.headline
Element of Critical Thinking: INFORMATION

# data[].attributes.subject
Element of Critical Thinking: INFORMATION

# data[].attributes.body
Synopsis:

The documentary frequently repeats that a true artificial intelligence will be the last invention the species needs to make. Our species finds itself at a fork in a road. What determines our path is the amount of responsibility we delegate to machines and how we embrace this new technology. The key contributors or interviewees in the documentary are experts in the field of artificial intelligence and data science. Including Ilya Sutskever, Michal Kosinski and Jürgen Schmidhuber, the father of modern AI. It is their expertise that the documentary relies on most when analyzing: the future implications of artificial intelligence and misuses of AI. For instance Ilya Sutskever, a former Google employee and current chief scientist at OpenAI, dissects the implication of Google’s alliance with the U.S. military in weaponizing AI (Project Maven). Michael Kosinski, a data scientist, speaks about how algorithms can be used in behavioral prediction and exploitation of a person’s proclivities from data gathered from Facebook.  Within the documentary some key pieces of information are pure conjecture; Sutskever says that ”cyber attacks will become more extreme”. An opinion that a large section of the documentary is based. Since this future has yet to be seen, it isn’t factual. Unfortunately Google and Facebook refused to participate in the documentary, obscuring a holistic view of the issue of AI in warfare and misuse of personal data.

Research:

This article discusses conditions that will make extreme cyberattacks possible, the assertion made by iHuman’s interviewee Ilya Sutskever. As it turns out this wasn’t just hyperbole. Author Pavel Sharikov observes that because artificial intelligence is readily available more non-government affiliated individuals or persons working in tandem have the capacity to conduct cyberattacks. As AI develops and becomes more intuitive it is very likely that the rate of cyberattacks will increase. As this technology is applied more rigorously in society, more aspects of that society will be vulnerable to cyberattack. It becomes a matter of ‘when’ these cyberattacks will become more pervasive. “With the advent of machine learning, more targets have become available for computer hacking, meaning that critical infrastructure -- banking systems, airport flight tracking, hospital records, the programs that run the nation’s nuclear power reactors -- can be vulnerable” (Sharikov par. 6). Sharikov’s work supports Sutskever’s assertion of extreme cyberattacks becoming more prevalent.

Citation:

Sharikov, Pavel. “Artificial Intelligence, Cyberattack, and Nuclear Weapons—A Dangerous Combination.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 74, no. 6, Nov. 2018, pp. 368–373. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00963402.2018.1533185.

# data[].attributes.body
Synopsis:

This issue of AI and the solution the documentary advocates for has its fair share of complications. The expert contributors (interviewees) support the implementation of legislative regulations of artificially intelligent systems and to eventually imbue these systems with a form of moral code, in the vein of Asimov’s laws of robotics. Would these restrictions infringe on a corporation’s rights? Of the many applications of AI, how does one determine which application to regulate? Who adjudicates these regulations, how valid is their authority on morality if they’re determining the ethics of AI? It is clear however, in conjunction with expert consensus on regulating artificial intelligence, that there is an answer to the problem of AI.

Research:

It seems I only have one source…

This chapter from AI and Big Data’s Potential for Disruptive Innovation illustrates the challenges facing all aspects of society. Authors, Strydom and Buckely make the observation of disruption within industries which have few companies utilizing AI. They propose a solution and state that “faced with disruption, there is now only one option: to disrupt oneself to avoid being disrupted” (Strydom and Buckley 2). This illustrates the type of disruption that is already happening in sectors where single businesses use AI and benefit massively. The array of applications for artificially intelligent systems obfuscates how to deploy regulations. Every industry will have to incorporate different stipulations which complicates who adjudicates such statuses. This chapter sheds light on the complications of the solution that the documentary proposes while supporting the need for that same solution, or “the precipitation towards broad applicability results in algorithms and social platforms being under-regulated, and, thus, collaterally being easily weaponized resulting in cybersecurity becoming a veritable and accelerating threat” (Strydom and Buckley 8).

Citation:

Strydom, Moses John, and Sheryl Beverley Buckley. "Big Data Intelligence and Perspectives in Darwinian Disruption." AI and Big Data's Potential for Disruptive Innovation, edited by Moses Strydom and Sheryl Buckley, Engineering Science Reference, 2020, pp. 1-43. Advances in Computational Intelligence and Robotics. Gale eBooks, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX7997900012/GVRL?u=mcc_chandler&sid=GVRL&xid=2991bc49. Accessed 7 Dec. 2020.

# data[].attributes.body
Synopsis:

iHuman documents prospective integrations of artificial intelligence within society; with a focus on its uses that are detrimental to civil liberties. That is the special significance of iHuman, it weaves expert opinion with known misuses of AI to illustrate the danger of unregulated artificial intelligence. The documentary has the objective of informing its audience that AI isn’t inherently good or evil but a most powerful tool that expedites the goals of the user. To communicate the danger of AI, an interviewee submits the question to the viewer, “what would Mengele do if he had this weapon at his disposal”? Imparting to the audience, that artificial intelligence exacerbates the deterioration of human rights in authoritarian, surveillant states.

Research:

My research on this element was about the AI arms race between China, Russia and the U.S. and the growing influence of the battle between communist versus democratic ideologies on the world stage. This article by Jinghan Zeng was important in understanding the purpose of the documentary because it analyzes one of the largest current issues of artificial intelligence. That is, whoever dominates an AI industry will become a world power of supreme influence.”China is now leading AI technology in areas such as facial recognition that Europe and the United States have to put on hold -- or even banned -- owing to privacy concerns. In contrast to western democratic societies, for China the key barrier to AI advancement lies in technological rather than legal constraints” (Zeng 2020) . Or AI development flourishes in environments with less restrictions, meaning China and Russia already have the advantage over the U.S..

Citation:

Zeng, Jinghan. “Artificial Intelligence and China’s Authoritarian Governance.” International Affairs, vol. 96, no. 6, Nov. 2020, pp. 1441–1459. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1093/ia/iiaa172.

# data[].attributes.body
Using expert opinion and relevant information on the issue the documentary weaves an informative truth concerning the dangers and perils and artificial intelligence. Specifically, filmmaker Tonje Schei pragmatically constructs a potentially dreadful view -- a truth -- of the future should we lack due diligence in regulating AI. You’ll find very few in opposition to this truth; the scarcity of repudiation from the likes of Google or Facebook speaks to the integrity of this truth. Discerning the point of view of iHuman from propaganda, mendacity, or obfuscation comes easy with the contributing expertise of Ilya Sutskever, Michal Kosinski and Jürgen Schmidhuber -- authorities on the subject. Investigation into the truth of this documentary reveals the authenticity of the assertions that the truth is based. The implications of this truth is visualized through the development of iHuman’s allegory for artificial intelligence, a proverbial ihuman. This visualization is powerful in its effect to convey the future with unregulated artificial intelligence, where AI surpasses incapable restraints.