A bill headed to the Senate floor in Utah would require officers to disclose if a police report was written by generative AI. The bill, S.B. 180, requires a department to have a policy governing the u...
Read Full Article »Utah Bill Aims to Make Officers Disclose AI-Written Police Reports
Discussion Points
- Regulation vs. Transparency: Should the primary focus be on regulating the use of generative AI in police reports or prioritizing transparency and public awareness about its potential risks and limitations?
- Accountability and Human Agency: Can AI-generated police reports ever truly account for human agency, and if not, how can we ensure that officers are held accountable for their actions and words in such reports?
- The Dark Side of Technological Advancements: Are the benefits of using generative AI in policing worth the potential risks and harms, particularly when it comes to exacerbating issues of bias, mistrust, and Orwellian surveillance?
Summary
A Utah bill, S.B. 180, would require police departments to disclose if reports were written by generative AI.
While this is a necessary step, it's not enough to address the concerns surrounding AI-generated reports. The technology's limitations in accurately processing language, nuances, and context pose significant risks, particularly in high-stakes settings like traffic stops.
Furthermore, the lack of transparency and oversight around these tools enables potential biases and abuses. As cities push back against their use, it's essential to consider the broader implications and strive for more robust regulations and public awareness to mitigate these harms.