I think AI isn't the issue so much as the boundaries of what others are and are not ethically and morally permitted to do, and since most of the population seems to not respect much of anything in terms of such boundaries, I'm against it. I don't think it falls on the ideological compass at all, anymore than a gun does. They're both tools, the person/institution wielding the tool can be the issue. Since governments tend toward expansion and abuse of their power, I think all their power should be strictly limited regardless of what benefits might come if they weren't. I definitely think in individual instances you can reach counter intuitive conclusions as to what to do or what 'side' to support on this issue or that which might lead to a person allying with 'the left' or 'the right' on different issues, but I don't see that here, at least not as of yet.

Of course, as a practical matter, I'm not sure if this can be stopped or limited in any way, so I guess we'll find out. My guess is they're going to use it anyway. I think what's more interesting is what that use might expose, both in who commits crimes more or less, who gets targeted more or less, who gets sentences more or less, etc. For example, lots of people on 'the right' in the US claim crime is out of control and the US is soft on crime, but I have trouble squaring that with our incarceration rates. If we're so free here, and we're so soft on crime, what's everyone rotting in jail and prison for? My guess is there's something even deeper than racial and socioeconomic disparities, and that certain victims gets more 'justice' than others, and my guess is that skews toward those with political connections and money, or both, and that this likely supersedes all the other things people usually obsess over when it comes to the US justice system. AI might expose that, or exacerbate it, and either one would be interesting to see, along with society's overall response when it's exposed.