A clear alternative to “AI” is to focus on the people present in the system. If a program is able to distinguish cats from dogs, don’t talk about how a machine is learning to see. Instead talk about how people contributed examples in order to define the visual qualities distinguishing “cats” from “dogs” in a rigorous way for the first time. There's always a second way to conceive of any situation in which AI is purported. This matters, because the AI way of thinking can distract from the responsibility of humans.
A sad example of Microsoft's chat bot Tay shocked everyone, but what did the developers expect?
The world looks pretty only because huge resources are allocated for security needs. And we are constantly balancing on the verge of self-destruction.
Some folks say it's because of capitalism. No, it's because of human nature. Soviets tried to change that - and failed miserably.
Human nature is irreparable, because aggression is a side effect of intelligence. I mean when IQ is high but not high enough to anticipate all the consequences.
And if all people have an IQ of 140 or higher, society will also fail. The only solution is full transparency, both for state and large corporations.