arXiv:2605.28210v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Drawing on Ullmann-Margalit's concept of opting (transformative, irrevocable, and shadowed by foreclosed alternatives), we show that current AI systems raise a profound ethical problem that existing AI ethics has not fully captured: the illusion of opting, in which persons and groups encounter the deceptive appearance of meaningful consequential choice while the agency needed to become genuinely capable of choosing is weakened. Against approaches that treat AI primarily as an optimizer of already given ends, we argue that AI systems should be eva
The increasing deployment of advanced AI systems in critical decision-making processes makes the ethical implications of user agency a pressing concern.
This highlights a foundational ethical challenge in AI development, moving beyond simple 'bias' to questions of systemic agency erosion, which could undermine public trust and regulatory frameworks.
The focus of AI ethics may shift from merely optimising predetermined ends to critically examining how AI shapes and potentially diminishes human agency in consequential choices.
- · Ethical AI researchers
- · Regulatory bodies focused on consumer protection
- · Advocacy groups for digital rights
- · AI developers prioritizing deployment over ethical review
- · Companies designing opaque AI systems
- · Users unaware of agency erosion
Increased scrutiny and demand for transparency in AI systems involved in consequential decisions.
Development of new AI design principles and regulatory mandates focused on preserving and enhancing human agency.
A potential re-evaluation of legal liability and accountability in cases where AI-mediated decisions are deemed to have unjustly constrained human choice.
This signal links to a primary source. Continuum Brief monitors and indexes it as part of the live intelligence stream — we do not republish source content.
Read at arXiv cs.AI