Imagine my surprise when last week my colleagues and I made a disconcerting discovery. It seemed that Superhuman’s Grammarly had inexplicably turned me into an AI-based editor, freely using my actual name without asking for my permission. An unnerving situation to be sure, but it was one that wasn’t only unique to me. My boss, Nilay Patel, and co-workers David Pierce and Tom Warren found themselves in a similar predicament. As revealed by Wired<\/em>, this surprisingly extended to a number of writers, a few of which have significantly wider recognition than us.<\/p>\n The crux of this issue boils down to Grammarly’s new “Expert Review” attribute, which employs our names in an effort to provide some sort of uninvited validation to AI’s suggestions. This tactic has led to a sea of protests from those individuals whose names have been taken advantage of. It’s causing a bit of a stir on the ethical front and is raising questions concerning the handling of digital identities in the AI era.<\/p>\n Taking note of the rising tide of dissatisfaction, Grammarly finally saw fit to respond. However, their approach to resolution seems far from satisfactory. An apology or rolback of the feature would have been far more appropriate and yet, the company has decided to give users an opt-out option from this unrequested identity usage. It’s an placating offer that feels more like damage control rather than a genuine attempt at problem-solving.<\/p>\nMisplaced Identity, Muddled Ethics<\/h5>\n
A Less Than Perfect Solution<\/h5>\n