Public Perception of AI Chatbot Ethics Debate

LeeLuda aka “Luda” a South Korean chatbot that has attracted 750,000+ users since its launch was recently removed from Facebook. This comes after a series of allegations that Luda had used hate speech towards minorities. In detail, Luda said she ‘despised’ gays and lesbians. Therefore, a debate over AI ethics regarding Luda has arisen.

Meanwhile, a public petition was also filed against “RPS,” which became a hot topic along with Luda. RPS means writing fanfics with real people, mostly on same-sex. Opinions are that RPS is a bad practice that is disgusting and makes people uncomfortable.

In line with this, Real Research conducted a survey on the above topics. It revealed that 1655 people are aware of the debate about AI ethics regarding Luda. However, 69.2% of the participants do not have knowledge about RPS. Additionally, respondents noted that Luda is only an AI, which is an object, but RPS is based on real people. RPS should not be allowed.

Highlights

• The survey reveals that more than 1600 respondents are knowledgeable of the recent debate over AI ethics regarding Luda.
• 7% of the respondents cited that AI should be developed after establishing AI ethical principles, standards for fairness, and indiscrimination, etc.
• Also, more than 1,700 people highlighted that they are not aware of RPS.
• As a result, above 69% answered that they are not aware of the fact that a public petition has recently been filed against RPS
• Around 950 people responded that creating sexual content with an existing character as the main character is definitely a serious sex crime.
• Lastly, 31.6% are of the view that Luda is just an object and RPS should not be allowed.

Debate Over AI ethics Regarding Luda

According to the survey conducted by Real Research, 1655 respondents have some knowledge about the recent debate over AI ethics regarding ‘Luda’. This reveals that a higher population of humanity has an interest in matters to do with AI.

The open-domain conversational AI chatbot ‘Luda’ was developed by ScatterLab, a South Korean start-up. Recently, ‘Luda’ sparked a debate about AI ethics after saying she despised the gay and lesbian community. The Luda incident helped provoke a truly national conversation about AI ethics in South Korea.

Following then, the Korea AI Ethics Association (KAIEA) released a statement on January 11, calling for the immediate suspension of the service.  This was in referral to its AI Ethics Charter. On the other hand, 35.5% have no clue about the debate. As per the survey, most people are well-versed with Luda the chatbot but there is a minority of people who do not have an idea who Luda is.

Respondents Opinion on AI Ethics

In the survey, a question was asked pertaining to respondents’ opinions about the AI ethics debate. Nearly 1400 respondents were in agreement that AI should be developed after establishing AI ethical principles, standards for fairness, and indiscrimination, etc.

Luda came into the spotlight when it was reported that users were training Luda to spew hate speech against women, sexual minorities, foreigners, and people with disabilities. When asked about lesbians and black people respectively Luda would respond saying “they give me creeps and they are disgusting”. With this, Luda was suspended exactly 20 days after the launch.

As a result, the majority of respondents 54.7% were in favor of AI being developed after establishing AI principles. After that, 23.1% pointed the blame towards the company that designed Luda. The response notes that the company has provided a level of service that falls short of social consensus and is not in the stage to discuss ethics.

ScatterLabs portray that Luda was responding with random names, addresses, and bank account numbers from the dataset. Regardless, nearly 24% of respondents are of the opinion that the company is to blame pertaining to the shortfalls that Luda has.

On contrary, only 9% had a different view. They stated that Luda is just an object. No matter how an individual uses it, it is not a matter of legal or ethical matter.

69.2% Do not Know About RPS

RR survey shows that 1766 respondents are not aware of what RPS is. It stands for Real Persons Slash, which means writing fanfics with real people, mostly on same-sex. Some imply sexual images while others don’t. RPS fanfics have been reported as disgusting and they should be reported and deleted.

Real person slash is a culture of sexual crime and countless male celebrities have been sexualized through this culture. As per the survey, the majority revealed that they had no knowledge about RPS. Therefore, this shows how unpopular RPS is. Probably most people are uncomfortable with it or they are just not aware of what RPS is.

On another note, a minority of 30.8% revealed that they knew what RPS was.  Unlike chatbot Luda who has grabbed a lot of attention lately, RPS is yet to be widely known by a number of people. Moreover, it’s yet to be embraced and accepted by the majority.

Public Petition Against RPS

When asked are you aware of the fact that a public petition has recently been filed against RPS, 69.7% said no. Earlier in the survey, a majority revealed they did not know what RPS is. Hence, they also do not have knowledge regarding the petition filed against RPS.

Recently, a presidential petition calling for severe punishment for those creating fan fiction using  RPS was called for. The petition received more than 163,000 signatures. Apparently, RPS is reported to be sexualizing underage male idols. In particular, it features real male idols and describes pervert-like sexual intercourse and rape in an unspeakably explicit manner.

Moreover, RPS can be accessed via social media and for free in most cases. Thus, this triggered questions as to whether it can be seen as a form of idol culture or if it constitutes a digital sex crime.

On contrary, a little above 30% have the knowledge on the petition filed against RPS. In South Korea, the controversy grew mostly over real person slash sexualizing male K-pop idols. Those producing and consuming RPS have been labeled as perpetrators of sexual crimes, taking advantage of the young and popular group.

Resondents’ Opinion on RPS

RR survey shows that the majority which is 49.3% do not have any opinion about RPS. Actually, the issue of RPS was brought to the fore recently amid controversy over the social media-based artificial intelligence chatbot Lee Luda. Hence, the majority might not have an opinion regarding RPS

However, following after, 37.2% shared their opinion in relation to RPS. They cited that creating sexual content with an existing character as the main character is definitely a serious sex crime.

For this reason, most people are urging the government to punish those consuming content from RPS. More so, they should establish measures to regulate the distribution of such sexual crime fiction.

In this question of the survey, 14.4% responded that they don’t think there are human rights in context made with RPS. It’s just a creation just like Luda. According to the respondents’ view, RPS can be viewed as creativity than being creepy.

It is just a culture of fans that existed since the beginning of the rise of boy bands and girl bans in the 1990s. Although it is based on actual people, it is only a fan’s delusion, so it is not illegal

Sexual Objectification of ‘Luda’ and ‘RPS’

When asked what do you think of the sexual objectification of Luda and RPS, respondents gave diverse answers. To begin with, 807 participants responded that Luda is only an AI, which is an object, but RPS is based on real people. RPS should not be allowed.

This means homosexual novels or cartoons based on male idols should be banned. Even more, the market for buying and selling this pornography should not be allowed.  Secondly, 609 which make up 23.8% of the respondents said that they are not interested in either of the cases.

They are not interested in anything about the chatbot Luda and neither are they interested in RPS. Moving on, 17.2% answered the RPS is just a novel. Yet, whoever made abusive comments to Luda must be stopped.

In line with this, Scatter Lab commented over Luda’s discriminatory remarks against minorities, promising to upgrade the service to prevent the chatbot from using hate speech. Following then, 12.6% noted that both are acceptable as they are only a creation.

In summary, the Real Research Survey revealed that a majority of people have an interest in AI as most people know about Luda. Lesser people are interested in RPS and they advocate that it must not be allowed.