The AI Ethics Brief #187: The Myth of Inevitability

2026-03-31 · Source: The AI Ethics Brief · Field: Technology & Digital — Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning, Cybersecurity & Data Privacy, Emerging Technologies & Innovation · Depth: Intermediate, extended

Summary

The AI Ethics Brief, a bi-weekly publication by the Montreal AI Ethics Institute, examines the contested infrastructure of AI, focusing on who controls its development and bears its costs. This edition highlights four key areas: the "inevitability myth" of AI, pervasive surveillance via consumer devices and law enforcement networks, Big Tech's adoption of fossil fuel industry tactics, and layered corporate AI governance. It details how narratives of AI's unavoidable progress are used to centralize power, while simultaneously exposing how devices like Meta's Ray-Ban smart glasses and Flock Safety's 80,000-90,000 license plate cameras contribute to a growing surveillance state. The brief also explores how companies like Anthropic define model behavior through a "governance stack," revealing broader patterns in corporate AI accountability.

Key takeaway

For executives and policymakers evaluating AI adoption and regulation, recognize that the "inevitability" narrative is a strategic tool to consolidate power and should not dictate your organization's approach. Prioritize democratic deliberation and community-centric development, actively resisting the incremental assembly of surveillance infrastructure through individual procurement decisions. Your decisions on AI governance and deployment must account for broader societal impacts, not just immediate technical or economic gains.

Key insights

AI's infrastructure is being built and governed by a few, while its societal costs are broadly distributed and contested.

Principles

• AI inevitability is a business strategy, not a scientific consensus.
• Surveillance infrastructure is assembled incrementally through individual product and contract decisions.
• Corporate AI governance often relies on layered policy documents to define model behavior.

Method

The "Resisting, Refusing, Reclaiming, Reimagining AI" framework offers a structured approach to counter dominant AI narratives and build alternative, community-centric technological futures.

In practice

• Challenge narratives that present AI development as unavoidable.
• Scrutinize privacy policies and data handling for smart devices.
• Investigate local government contracts for surveillance technologies.

Topics

• AI Ethics
• AI Governance
• Surveillance Technology
• Data Privacy
• Democratic Deliberation

Best for: CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Executive, AI Ethicist, Policy Maker, Director of AI/ML

Related on AIssential

• The Age of the Algorithm: AI Is Remaking Power, Profit, and Conscience Across the Globe — The rapid global advancement of AI is outstripping governance capabilities, fundamentally reshaping societal structures and raising ethical concerns.
• The Age of Inevitability: A Silicon Valley Tale — Advanced AI development is often detached from its real-world resource implications and societal impacts.
• Kayfable — Anthropic strategically orchestrates public narratives and government interactions to advance its vision of controlled, undemocratic AI ownership.
• Open Source — Open-source AI often misrepresents its capabilities, failing to address core power concentrations in the AI industry.
• The AI Ethics Brief #191: The Terms of the Bargain — AI adoption entails a bargain, trading human agency and accountability for perceived efficiency and convenience, prompting widespread resistance.
• The AI Ethics Brief #192: Canada Has a National AI Strategy. The Hard Questions Come Next. — Canada's AI strategy defers critical governance and accountability questions, creating a gap between stated intent and structural follow-through.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by The AI Ethics Brief.