Will Artificial Intelligence create more barriers between developed and developing countries?

It is good to see that the developed countries are taking the emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) so seriously that they have been holding a special conference at Bletchley Park, in the UK, to discuss the threat AI could pose to the future of humanity on earth.

If care is not taken, the AI show will, however, become – like so many others – a show by the developed nations, for the developed nations and worse, of the developed nations. And sold to developing countries wholesale.

It’s a very easy trap to fall into because AI was invented in developed countries. It would have been unrealistic to imagine that the techno-wizards who were creating the software for the system, would pause and take account of the educational systems and technological services of the developing countries, and thereby create systems that would make AI user-friendly to developing countries.

Even where they have tried hard, we have seen the techno-wizards trip themselves over failures that are “failures” brought about by success.

Look at the way “cookies" were initially welcomed by internet users, for instance. Everyone recognised cookies as useful tools that made browsing easy and enjoyable. Yet they were soon corrupted to send viruses across the Internet! They could be “caught” and exterminated, eventually, of course, but sometimes, not before they had caused untold harm. Airlines and aircraft manufacturers, in particular, would easily agree that the harm caused to them and their customers by cyber attacks overrides the efficacy that cookies were originally invented to provide.


Through “cookies”, viruses have been steadily deployed against internet users, with malice aforethought! Viruses can arouse annoyance in the computer user, whose only objective is to create a document, obtain news, or stay in touch with friends, and who has no money to pay the ransom demanded by virus merchants.

As viruses have become more widespread, whole anti-cyber-crime systems have had to be created by the nations that could afford to do so, to stay safe and maintain essential services for their populace. Because of commercial gain and national security concerns, the developed countries do not reveal everything that cybercriminals succeed in perpetrating against them. But cyber crime has reached such an advanced stage that the elections which are the lifeblood of many democratic countries, are under serious threat.

If the developed countries are under serious threat, what about the people of developing countries? Maybe they only sleep soundly at night, because they do not know the full extent of what actually goes on behind the scenes in their governance and commerce.

Developing countries can, in fact, be punished by UNINTENDED obstacles (in the form of safeguards) inserted into artificial systems against fraud and impersonation. For instance, some robot answering services carry out unconscious “racial profiling”. This happens when a customer calls whose accent varies from the “norm”. Such a person might be denied the service or assistance he or she requires because of the west he/she speaks.


“Ageism” can be a factor in the sense that If the caller does not have the deftness of fingers (to input words and especially figures in a telephone’s keypad) or if he/she misremembers a figure (such as a P.I.N.) the verifying system might block the customer. But worse is the fact that, if the system faults the customer, it would refuse to pass him or her to a human! It would do this because it was not programmed to understand that people do make mistakes.

Banks, in particular, owe a duty to ensure that those of their customers who are used to personal service, should not unnecessarily suffer from an exclusion of service.

Now, if at the elementary level of obtaining a common service from a bot, failures can be encountered, what about when bots are put in charge of the complex systems being rolled out which are so “clever” that even THE RICH GOVERNMENTS OF DEVELOPED COUNTRIES are scared of them?

As noted above, some banks are punishing poorer, assistance-prone customers, by cutting down on the number of bank branches and ATMS they provide to customers. That means that a customer who needs assistance to use the bank’s services, or an ATM to which he or she is accustomed, may be denied service by an “app” (installed on a mobile phone.) What happens when the phone is lost or damaged? Will there be TIMELY human help, when the number of call centres has been pruned to cut costs?

In other words, the poor and technically incompetent may be told by AI (in so many words) that it is “TIME FOR THEM TO DIE!” If you do not believe that that can happen, look for reports on the attitude adopted by the former British Prime Minister, Mr Boris Johnson, towards the care he thought aged people affected by Covid-19 should, or should NOT, receive from the British National Health Service during the outbreak of the disease. (An enquiry has been happening in Britain about the then British Government’s approach to the disease. The enquiry has brought disgusting revelations about the callous attitude towards the disease’s victims, of Mr Johnson and some of his Ministers.)

Maybe those British politicians took their cue from the creators of AI? Such “innovators” can be great and hidden "persuaders”, no?

God save us!