Nomadic Artificial Intelligence and Royal Research Councils: Curiosity-Driven Research Against Imperatives Implying Imperialism

Citation

Galanos V (2022) Nomadic Artificial Intelligence and Royal Research Councils: Curiosity-Driven Research Against Imperatives Implying Imperialism. In: Chapman and Hall/CRC, pp. 173-208. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429446726-8

Abstract
What are we to make of terms such as “imperial” or “royal” applied in artificial intelligence (AI) research and discourse? While the phrase “global politics of AI” may pinpoint to political impacts AI technologies have at a global level, in order to avoid a technologically deterministic and speculative point of view (as suggested in Science and Technology Studies (STS) literature), it may be far more productive to look at what kind of politics are already imbued in the social history and construction of AI. For reasons of economy and scope, in this chapter, I examine research practices mostly in the UK (occasionally compared to US- and EU-related practices) using the conceptual metaphor of royal and nomadic science. This theoretical template suggests that radical science progresses in a nomadic, mobile manner, allowing researchers-nomads to make the most out of available resources in order to develop what might be recognised as innovative science. Opposed to them are State regimes, exploiting or withholding resources, aiming to absorb the nomadic knowledge to their advantage, keeping nomadic researchers in controlled stasis. I recommend that due to lessons from the history of AI (further analysed below), the metaphor of a nomadic AI can be a particularly useful tool to map the political processes of global movement in AI research.