Imagine a courtroom. The prosecutor presents evidence; an algorithmic risk score enters the picture. A verdict is reached—and then appealed. Then comes the uncomfortable question: what if a biased model influenced the decision? The way a system is designed and used can produce systematically different outcomes for different groups of defendants. In Wisconsin, this tension surfaced around the COMPAS scoring system used during sentencing. It is a warning sign: artificial intelligence, a tool with immense potential, is becoming both judge and executioner. And who will watch those who watch the algorithms?
Artificial Intelligence: From Sci-Fi to Ubiquitous Reality
What comes to mind when you hear the term “artificial intelligence”? Robots with red eyes, rebelling against humanity? Today, reality is far more prosaic, yet all-pervasive. AI has long ceased to be the exclusive domain of science fiction films. It’s in our smartphones, recommending music and movies, filtering spam in emails, powering autonomous vehicles. But what is AI, exactly?
It’s not about “thinking machines,” as we often mistakenly assume. Artificial intelligence, in its current form, is primarily a sophisticated statistical model. It learns from vast amounts of data – training data – and uses that information to predict future events or classify information. Deep learning, a key technology in modern AI, utilizes neural networks inspired by the structure of the human brain. But despite its complexity, AI has fundamental limitations: it lacks common sense, creativity, and ethical reasoning. It can excel in narrow specializations – hence we talk about “narrow AI” – but it cannot match human intelligence in a broader context. And what if we reach “artificial general intelligence” (AGI), capable of tackling any intellectual task? Is it a real threat, or just a distant dream?
The Dark Side of Progress: What Risks Does AI Pose?
While we enthusiastically discuss the possibilities that AI offers, we must not forget the risks. And there are many. The most pressing problem is bias in data. If training data is incomplete, unrepresentative, or contains historical prejudices, AI will learn them and reproduce them.
Imagine an algorithm for assessing creditworthiness that was trained on data from a time when women had limited access to financial services. The algorithm will automatically underestimate the creditworthiness of women, even if they are otherwise equally qualified as men. Similar problems arise in facial recognition, where algorithms often fail to recognize the faces of people with darker skin tones.
But the risks go much further. Autonomous weapons that decide life and death without human intervention. Deepfakes – fabricated videos that can ruin reputations and trigger political instability. Targeted disinformation, manipulating public opinion. The economic impact of automation and job losses. Security vulnerabilities in AI systems to attacks – adversarial attacks, where algorithms can be tricked by minor changes in data. And finally, the problem of control – how do we ensure that AI systems do what we want them to? How do we solve the alignment problem – aligning the goals of AI with human values?
Regulation in a Labyrinth: The AI Act, National Strategies and Global Efforts
How do we cope with these risks? Regulation is the answer. The European Union set the rules of the game by adopting the AI Act, an ambitious piece of legislation that classifies AI systems according to their level of risk. High-risk systems – for example, those affecting people’s lives or endangering fundamental rights – will be subject to strict requirements regarding transparency, safety and accountability. Penalties for non-compliance can be substantial.
The Czech Republic is responding with its National AI Strategy, which aims to promote the development and implementation of AI with due regard for ethical aspects. The strategy focuses on key areas – industry, healthcare, education and public administration. But is that enough? How does Czech regulation align with the ambitions of the AI Act?
Global approaches to regulating AI are diverse. The US is trying to promote innovation and minimize regulation, while China applies stricter control and emphasizes national security. How do we navigate this labyrinth? Is it possible to reach international consensus on the rules of the game, or will the world split into different blocs with differing standards?
Technical Shields: XAI, Robustness and Privacy as Keys to Trust
Regulation is important, but it’s not enough. We also need technical mechanisms that ensure the safety and reliability of AI systems. Explainable AI (XAI) – an effort to promote transparency and understandability in AI decision-making. If we know why an algorithm made a particular decision, we can better control it and identify any errors or biases.
Robustness – ensuring the resilience of AI systems to errors and attacks. Algorithms must not be easily fooled by minor changes in data. Federated learning – training AI on decentralized data without sharing the data itself. Protecting privacy during AI training – differential privacy.
But even these mechanisms have their limits. XAI is often complex and challenging to implement. Robustness isn’t absolute – there’s always a possibility that an algorithm will be tricked. And protecting privacy can lead to reduced accuracy of AI systems. How do we find the right balance between safety, reliability and privacy?
Who Holds the Reins: Stakeholders and Their Motivations in the Age of AI
Who should control the future of AI? Governments, striving to protect their citizens and national interests? Tech companies that invest billions in the development of AI and wield immense market influence? The academic sphere, seeking to understand the principles of AI and develop new technologies? Or civil society, trying to raise awareness about risks and promote ethical standards?
Each of these stakeholders has its own interests and motivations. Governments are trying to regulate AI in order to minimize risks and promote innovation. Tech companies are striving to maximize profits and maintain a competitive edge. The academic sphere is trying to develop new technologies and understand the principles of AI. And civil society is trying to raise awareness about risks and promote ethical standards. How do we achieve a balance between these interests? Is it possible to create a system that is fair and transparent for everyone?
Ethical Dilemmas: Autonomy, Accountability and Transparency in the Digital Age
AI opens up a range of ethical dilemmas. Who is responsible for AI errors? If an autonomous vehicle causes an accident, who is to blame – the car manufacturer, the algorithm programmer or the vehicle owner? How do we ensure transparency in AI decision-making? If an algorithm refuses to grant a loan to a particular group of people, we must know why.
Autonomy – how far can we let AI decide without human intervention? Accountability – who is responsible for AI errors? Transparency – how do we ensure understandability in AI decision-making? These questions don’t have simple answers. We need a multidisciplinary approach, involving experts from various fields – ethics, law, computer science and sociology.
Funding the Future: Economic Models for Ethical AI Development
Developing and implementing AI requires massive investment. Who should fund these investments? Public sources, private capital or philanthropy? How do we ensure ethical AI development? We must avoid a situation where the development of AI is driven solely by profit.
Public investment can support basic research and AI development in areas that are not attractive to private capital. Private capital can fund commercial applications of AI, but it must be regulated and controlled. Philanthropy can support ethical AI development and raise awareness about risks. How do we find the right balance between these sources?
The Future of AI Governance: Challenges and Opportunities on the Horizon
Governing AI is a complex challenge that requires international cooperation and a multidisciplinary approach. We must focus on key areas – regulation, technical mechanisms, ethics and funding. But despite all the challenges, a range of opportunities are emerging. AI can help solve global problems – climate change, poverty and disease. It can improve the quality of people’s lives and promote economic growth.
But to take advantage of these opportunities, we must learn to control AI. We must ensure that it is safe, reliable and ethical. And we must avoid a situation where AI is driven solely by profit or power.
The Script Is in Our Hands: Responsibility for the Future of Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence is not inherently good or bad. It’s a tool – and like any tool, it can be used for good or ill. The responsibility for its development and implementation lies with us. We must learn to write the script of the future, one that is fair and transparent for all. And we must realize that AI isn’t just a technological problem – it’s primarily a societal and ethical undertaking. The future is not predetermined, it’s in our hands. And now is the time to start shaping it.
Content Transparency and AI Assistance
How this article was created:
This article was generated with artificial intelligence assistance. Specifically, we used the Gemma 3 27b language model, running locally in LM‑Studio. Our editorial team established the topic, research direction, and primary sources; the AI then generated the initial structure and draft text.
Want to know more about this model? Read our article about Gemma 3.
Editorial review and fact-checking:
- ✓ The text was editorially reviewed
- ✓ Fact-checking: All key claims and data were verified
- ✓ Fact corrections and enhancement: Our editorial team corrected factual inaccuracies and added subject matter expertise
AI model limitations (important disclaimer):
Language models can generate plausible-sounding but inaccurate or misleading information (known as “hallucinations”). We therefore strongly recommend:
- Verifying critical facts in primary sources (official documentation, peer-reviewed research, subject matter authorities)
- Not relying on AI-generated content as your sole information source for decision-making
- Applying critical thinking when reading
Technical details:
- Model: Gemma-3-27b (License: Gemma Terms of Use)
- Execution: Running locally in LM-Studio
- Learn more: Official repository
Be First to Comment