STANFORD, CA — Dr. Margaret Sullivan, a leading expert in AI ethics who has published over 200 peer-reviewed papers on the responsible development of artificial intelligence, has confessed to feeling “professionally uncertain” after discovering that not a single person with actual decision-making power has ever read any of her work.
“I’ve spent 15 years warning about algorithmic bias, data privacy violations, and the societal risks of deploying AI systems without proper safeguards,” Sullivan explained from her office, which features several prestigious academic awards and a slowly dying houseplant she says “represents the state of the field.” “And I’ve recently come to understand that everyone making decisions is just completely ignoring all of it.”
The revelation came during a recent technology conference where Sullivan presented a meticulously researched paper on the dangers of racing to deploy AI without adequate testing.
“I finished my presentation, and this 26-year-old in a Patagonia vest raised his hand and said, ‘That’s really interesting, but have you considered that we need to move fast and break things?’” Sullivan recalled. “I said that breaking things in this context could mean destabilizing democracy and perpetuating systemic discrimination. He said, ‘Right, but what about shareholder value?’ And then everyone nodded.”
According to colleagues, Sullivan has since been questioning whether her career has had any meaningful impact.
“She keeps looking at her CV and sighing,” reported fellow professor Dr. Kevin Wong. “Yesterday she spent three hours calculating that she’s delivered approximately 847 warnings about AI risk to various companies and governments, and exactly zero of those warnings resulted in any policy changes. She made a pie chart. It was mostly just red.”
Sullivan acknowledged that she’s considered pivoting to a new field.
“Someone told me I should just learn to code and get a job at a big tech company,” she said. “Maybe I could become an ‘AI ethics advisor.’ I hear those roles involve attending a lot of meetings, writing reports that get filed in a drawer, and collecting a salary while watching the company do exactly what you told them not to do. At least I’d have dental insurance.”
The tech industry has responded to Sullivan’s work with what sources describe as “performative interest followed by complete inaction.”
“We absolutely value input from ethicists like Dr. Sullivan,” said the Chief Ethics Officer at a major AI company, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We have her papers on a shelf somewhere. Probably. The point is, we’re committed to responsible AI development as long as it doesn’t slow us down, cost money, or require us to change anything we’re doing.”
Sullivan noted that she’s been particularly demoralized by watching concepts she warned about years ago become reality without anyone connecting the dots.
“In 2019, I published a paper about the risks of generative AI being used for misinformation,” she said. “It was very well-received in academic circles. I got some nice emails. Then 2023 happened, and everyone was like, ‘Who could have predicted this?’ I was screaming into the void for four years. The void just didn’t subscribe to the Journal of AI Ethics.”
When asked about her plans moving forward, Sullivan said she was considering writing a book titled “I Told You So: A Complete History of Everyone Not Listening.”
At press time, Sullivan had received an email from a major tech company asking if she’d be interested in serving on their “AI Ethics Advisory Board,” a position that would involve quarterly meetings, a modest stipend, and absolutely no authority over anything.