Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

An Analysis of Artificial-Intelligence Activist and Regulatory Reform Movements from the Perspective of the Neo-Luddite Movement

Year 2025, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 342 - 372, 05.12.2025

Tolga Barman , İrem Çakın

https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.1662275

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between the neo-Luddite movement and the emerging artificial-intelligence activist and regulatory reform movements. For this purpose, eight activist and regulatory reform movements were found through online searches using the keywords “artificial intelligence activism,” “no AI movements,” and “anti artificial intelligence activism.” Thematic analysis was then employed to evaluate the extent to which the discourses and attitudes of these movements overlap with the neo-Luddite movement. The study was limited to the open letters, action plans, and blog posts of the communities on the official websites of the eight movements. The findings reveal two major themes: (1) concern about artificial intelligence and (2) accountability and process management. Under the theme of concern, the sub-themes of information security, technological unemployment, and life safety were identified, and a multi-layered interpretation was offered to address the social, legal, ethical, and political dimensions of these sub-themes from a security and stability perspective. Under the theme of accountability and process management, movements’ views on potential problem-causing and solution-creating actors were compiled and the relevant findings were presented. It was observed that seven movements interpret private companies as problem-causing actors, and one movement interprets both private companies and the state authority in this light. Seven movements adopt the view that the state is the actor with the greatest potential to solve these problems, and one movement adopts the view that private companies are. This suggests that these movements rely on the state’s power of enforcement in this matter rather than on private companies’ capacity to find solutions on their own. In the solution plans of the movements, it was found that four movements are radical and four are moderate. The study concludes that the discourses of activist and regulatory reform movements towards artificial intelligence are compatible with neo-Luddite principles. The study is important in terms of contributing to the literature on artificial intelligence, activism, and artificial-intelligence ethics.

Keywords

Communication studies artificial intelligence neo-luddite technology activism

Ethical Statement

There is no ethical statement required for this research.

References

  • AI Now Institute. 2023. “US-China AI Race: AI Policy as Industrial Policy”. Erişim tarihi 11 Nisan 2023. https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/us-china-ai-race.
  • Alamäki, Ari, Marko Mäki ve R. M. Chandima Ratnayake. 2019. “Privacy Concern, Data Quality and Trustworthiness of AI-Analytics”. Publication. 15505. Satakunnan ammattikorkeakoulu. 2019. http://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/226461.
  • Anguiano, Dani ve Lois Beckett. 2023. “How Hollywood Writers Triumphed over AI – and Why It Matters”. The Guardian, 01 Ekim 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/oct/01/hollywood-writers-strike-artificial-intelligence.
  • Atlas, Ronald M. 2002. “Bioterrorism: From Threat to Reality”. Annual Review of Microbiology 56 (Volume 56, 2002): 167-85. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.56.012302.160616.
  • Babbs, Verity. 2023. “Digital Artists Are Pushing Back Against AI”. Hyperallergic. 06 Mart 2023. http://hyperallergic.com/806026/digital-artists-are-pushing-back-against-ai/.
  • Carmody, Jillian, Samir Shringarpure ve Gerhard Van de Venter. 2021. “AI and privacy concerns: a smart meter case study”. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 19 (4): 492-505. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-04-2021-0042.
  • Center for AI Safety. t.y. “AI Risks That Could Lead to Catastrophe”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://www.safe.ai/ai-risk.
  • Clarke, Victoria ve Virginia Braun. 2017. “Thematic Analysis”. The Journal of Positive Psychology 12 (3): 297-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613.
  • Cohen, Daniel. 1995. The misfortunes of prosperity: an introduction to modern political economy. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
  • Cookson, Clive. 2016. “AI and robots threaten to unleash mass unemployment, scientists warn”. Financial Times, 14 Şubat 2016. https://www.ft.com/content/063c1176-d29a-11e5-969e-9d801cf5e15b.
  • Coyle, Jake. 2023. “In Hollywood Writers’ Battle against AI, Humans Win (for Now)”. AP News, 27 Eylül 2023. https://apnews.com/article/hollywood-ai-strike-wga-artificial-intelligence-39ab72582c3a15f77510c9c30a45ffc8.
  • Edwards, Benj. 2022. “Artists Stage Mass Protest against AI-Generated Artwork on ArtStation”. Ars Technica. 15 Aralık 2022. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/artstation-artists-stage-mass-protest-against-ai-generated-artwork/.
  • European Parliament. 2024. “Artificial Intelligence Act”. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0138_EN.html.
  • Floridi, Luciano, Josh Cowls, Monica Beltrametti, Raja Chatila, Patrice Chazerand, Virginia Dignum, Christoph Luetge, vd. 2018. “AI4People—An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations”. Minds and Machines 28 (4): 689-707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5.
  • Formosa, Paul. 2021. “Robot Autonomy vs. Human Autonomy: Social Robots, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the Nature of Autonomy”. Minds and Machines 31 (4): 595-616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09579-2.
  • Fuchs, Christian. 2014. Digital Labour and Karl Marx. New York: Routledge.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.a. “Artificial Intelligence”.Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://futureoflife.org/cause-area/artificial-intelligence/.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.b. “Our Position on AI”. t.y. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://futureoflife.org/our-position-on-ai/.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.c. “Safety Standards Delivering Controllable and Beneficial AI Tools”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://futureoflife.org/document/safety-standards-delivering-controllable-and-beneficial-ai-tools/.
  • Future of Life Institute. 2023. “Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter”. Erişim tarihi 22 Mart 2023. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/.
  • Glendinning, Chellis. 1990. “Notes toward a neo-Luddite manifesto”. Utne Reader 38 (1): 50-53.
  • Guliyev, Hasraddin. 2023. “Artificial intelligence and unemployment in high-tech developed countries: New insights from dynamic panel data model”. Research in Globalization 7:100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100140.
  • Hunt-Bull, Nicholas. 2006. “A neo-luddite manifesto: Or why I do not love robots”. Erişim tarihi 23 Mart 2024. https://cdn.aaai.org/Workshops/2006/WS-06-09/WS06-09-011.pdf.
  • Joffe, Helene. 2011. “Thematic Analysis”. Içinde Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy, 209-23. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119973249.ch15.
  • Johnston, Allen C., ve Merrill Warkentin. 2010. “Fear Appeals and Information Security Behaviors: An Empirical Study”. MIS Quarterly 34 (3): 549-66. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750691.
  • Jones, Steven E. 2013. Against Technology : From the Luddites to Neo-Luddism. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203960455.
  • Kaplan, Alexandra D., Theresa T. Kessler, J. Christopher Brill, ve P. A. Hancock. 2023. “Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Meta-Analytic Findings”. Human Factors 65 (2): 337-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208211013988.
  • Klietmann, Wolfgang F. ve Kathryn L. Ruoff. 2001. “Bioterrorism: Implications for the Clinical Microbiologist”. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 14 (2): 364-81. https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.14.2.364-381.2001.
  • Kronemann, Bianca, Hatice Kizgin, Nripendra Rana ve Yogesh K. Dwivedi. 2023. “How AI encourages consumers to share their secrets? The role of anthropomorphism, personalisation, and privacy concerns and avenues for future research”. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC 27 (1): 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-10-2022-0213.
  • Merchant, Brian. 2023. Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
  • Miles, Matthew B. ve A. Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. California: SAGE.
  • Mittelstadt, Brent. 2019. “Principles Alone Cannot Guarantee Ethical AI”. Nature Machine Intelligence 1 (11): 501-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4.
  • O’Rourke, Kevin Hjortshøj, Ahmed S. Rahman ve Alan M. Taylor. 2013. “Luddites, the Industrial Revolution, and the Demographic Transition”. Journal of Economic Growth 18 (4): 373-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-013-9096-y.
  • PauseAI. t.y.a. “FAQ”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://pauseai.info/faq#who-are-you.
  • PauseAI. t.y.b. “Risks of Artificial Intelligence”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://pauseai.info/risks#fake-news-polarization-and-threatening-democracy.
  • PauseAI. t.y.c. “The Feasibility of a Pause”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://pauseai.info/feasibility#technical-enforceability-of-a-pause.
  • Pause AI. 2023. “Why We Might Have Superintelligence Sooner than Most Think”. Erişim tarihi 04 Mayıs 2023. https://pauseai.info/urgency#we-reached-human-level-performance-in-many-domains-in-2023.
  • Postel‐Vinay, Fabien. 2002. “The Dynamics of Technological Unemployment*”. International Economic Review 43 (3): 737-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2354.t01-1-00033.
  • Prunkl, Carina. 2024. “Human Autonomy at Risk? An Analysis of the Challenges from AI”. Minds and Machines 34 (3): 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-024-09665-1.
  • Rubinic, Igor, Marija Kurtov, Ivan Rubinic, Robert Likic, Paul I. Dargan ve David M. Wood. 2024. “Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Pharmacology: A Case Study and Scoping Review of Large Language Models and Bioweapon Potential”. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 90 (3): 620-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15899.
  • Ryan, Mark. 2020. “In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability”. Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (5): 2749-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00228-y.
  • Segment. t.y. “The Growth Report: The AI Edition | Twilio Segment”. Erişim tarihi 12 Ağustos 2024. https://segment.com/the-growth-report/.
  • Sethumadhavan, Arathi. 2019. “Trust in Artificial Intelligence”. Ergonomics in Design 27 (2): 34-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1064804618818592.
  • Siau, Keng ve Weiyu Wang. 2020. “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethics: Ethics of AI and Ethical AI”. Journal of Database Management (JDM) 31 (2): 74-87. https://doi.org/10.4018/JDM.2020040105.
  • Sims, Christopher A. 2013. Tech Anxiety: Artificial Intelligence and Ontological Awakening in Four Science Fiction Novels. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.
  • “State Government Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council Recommended Plan and Framework”. 2024. Oregon.
  • Stop Killer Robots. t.y. “Race and killer robots”. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/race-and-killer-robots/.
  • Stop Killer Robots. 2025. “We Can Stop Killer Robots”. Erişim tarihi 08 Şubat 2025. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/stop-killer-robots/we-can-stop-killer-robots/.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League. t.y. “Mission, Team and Story”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://www.ajl.org/about.
  • The FLI Team. 2023. “FLI on ‘A Statement on AI Risk’ and Next Steps”. Future of Life Institute (blog). 30 Mayıs 2023. https://futureoflife.org/partner-orgs/fli-on-a-statement-on-ai-risk-and-next-steps/.
  • Thormundsson, Bergur. 2024. “Topic: Artificial Intelligence (AI) Worldwide”. Statista. 2024. https://www.statista.com/topics/3104/artificial-intelligence-ai-worldwide/.
  • Urbina, Fabio, Filippa Lentzos, Cédric Invernizzi ve Sean Ekins. 2022. “Dual Use of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Drug Discovery”. Nature Machine Intelligence 4 (3): 189-91. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00465-9.
  • Williams-Grut, Oscar. 2016. “Robots Will Steal Your Job: How AI Could Increase Unemployment and Inequality”. Business Insider. 2016. https://www.businessinsider.com/robots-will-steal-your-job-citi-ai-increase-unemployment-inequality-2016-2.
  • Writers Guild of America. t.y.. “Artificial Intelligence”. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://www.wga.org/contracts/know-your-rights/artificial-intelligence.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. 2023. “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism”. İçinde Social Theory Re-Wired, 3. bs. New York: Routledge.

Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi

Year 2025, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 342 - 372, 05.12.2025

Tolga Barman , İrem Çakın

https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.1662275

Abstract

Bu çalışma yapay zekâ teknolojisine yönelik olarak ortaya çıkan aktivist ve düzenleyici reform hareketlerinin neo-ludist hareket ile ilişkisini incelemektedir. Bu amaçla çevrim içi ortamlarda “artificial intelligence activism”, “no AI movements” ve “anti artificial intelligence activism” anahtar kelimeleri ile yapılan taramalar sonucunda sekiz aktivist ve düzenleyici reform hareketine ulaşılmış; bu hareketlerin söylem ve tutumlarının neo-ludist hareket ile ne ölçüde örtüştüğü tematik analiz yöntemi kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışma, sekiz hareketin resmi internet sitelerinde yer alan; toplulukların açık mektupları, eylem planları ve blog yazıları ile sınırlandırılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular dahilinde, yapay zekâya yönelik endişe ile hesap verebilirlik ve süreç yönetimi adlı iki farklı tema ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Endişe temasının altında bilgi güvenliği, teknolojik işsizlik, can güvenliği alt temaları saptanmıştır. Bu alt temalarda güvenlik ve istikrar perspektifi çerçevesinde; toplumsal, hukuki, etik ve politik boyutlar üzerinden çok katmanlı bir yorum söz konusudur. Hesap verebilirlik ve süreç yönetimi teması altında hareketlerin sorun yaratan ve bu soruna çözüm üretebilecek olan aktörün kim olabileceğine dair görüşler derlenerek ilgili bulgular sunulmuştur. Görüşlerde yedi hareketin özel şirketleri, bir hareketin ise hem özel şirketler hem de devlet otoritesini sorun yaratan aktör olarak yorumladığı görülmüştür. Sorunu yedi hareket devletin, bir hareket ise özel şirketlerin çözebileceği görüşünü benimsemiştir. Bu durum, hareketlerin şirketlerin tek başına çözüm üretebilme kapasitesine değil devletin bu konudaki yaptırım gücüne güvendiğini göstermektedir. Çözüm planlarında dört hareketin radikal, dört hareketin ise ılımlı tutum sergilediği saptanmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda yapay zekâya yönelik aktivist ve düzenleyici reform hareketlerinin söylemlerinin neo-ludist ilkeler ile uyumlu oldukları sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma alanyazına yapay zekâ, aktivizm ve yapay zekâ etiği bağlamında katkı sağlaması açısından önem taşımaktadır.

Keywords

İletişim çalışmaları yapay zekâ neo-ludist teknoloji aktivizm

Ethical Statement

Çalışmada etik beyan gerektirecek bir durum söz konusu değildir.

References

  • AI Now Institute. 2023. “US-China AI Race: AI Policy as Industrial Policy”. Erişim tarihi 11 Nisan 2023. https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/us-china-ai-race.
  • Alamäki, Ari, Marko Mäki ve R. M. Chandima Ratnayake. 2019. “Privacy Concern, Data Quality and Trustworthiness of AI-Analytics”. Publication. 15505. Satakunnan ammattikorkeakoulu. 2019. http://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/226461.
  • Anguiano, Dani ve Lois Beckett. 2023. “How Hollywood Writers Triumphed over AI – and Why It Matters”. The Guardian, 01 Ekim 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/oct/01/hollywood-writers-strike-artificial-intelligence.
  • Atlas, Ronald M. 2002. “Bioterrorism: From Threat to Reality”. Annual Review of Microbiology 56 (Volume 56, 2002): 167-85. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.56.012302.160616.
  • Babbs, Verity. 2023. “Digital Artists Are Pushing Back Against AI”. Hyperallergic. 06 Mart 2023. http://hyperallergic.com/806026/digital-artists-are-pushing-back-against-ai/.
  • Carmody, Jillian, Samir Shringarpure ve Gerhard Van de Venter. 2021. “AI and privacy concerns: a smart meter case study”. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 19 (4): 492-505. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-04-2021-0042.
  • Center for AI Safety. t.y. “AI Risks That Could Lead to Catastrophe”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://www.safe.ai/ai-risk.
  • Clarke, Victoria ve Virginia Braun. 2017. “Thematic Analysis”. The Journal of Positive Psychology 12 (3): 297-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613.
  • Cohen, Daniel. 1995. The misfortunes of prosperity: an introduction to modern political economy. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
  • Cookson, Clive. 2016. “AI and robots threaten to unleash mass unemployment, scientists warn”. Financial Times, 14 Şubat 2016. https://www.ft.com/content/063c1176-d29a-11e5-969e-9d801cf5e15b.
  • Coyle, Jake. 2023. “In Hollywood Writers’ Battle against AI, Humans Win (for Now)”. AP News, 27 Eylül 2023. https://apnews.com/article/hollywood-ai-strike-wga-artificial-intelligence-39ab72582c3a15f77510c9c30a45ffc8.
  • Edwards, Benj. 2022. “Artists Stage Mass Protest against AI-Generated Artwork on ArtStation”. Ars Technica. 15 Aralık 2022. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/artstation-artists-stage-mass-protest-against-ai-generated-artwork/.
  • European Parliament. 2024. “Artificial Intelligence Act”. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0138_EN.html.
  • Floridi, Luciano, Josh Cowls, Monica Beltrametti, Raja Chatila, Patrice Chazerand, Virginia Dignum, Christoph Luetge, vd. 2018. “AI4People—An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations”. Minds and Machines 28 (4): 689-707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5.
  • Formosa, Paul. 2021. “Robot Autonomy vs. Human Autonomy: Social Robots, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the Nature of Autonomy”. Minds and Machines 31 (4): 595-616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09579-2.
  • Fuchs, Christian. 2014. Digital Labour and Karl Marx. New York: Routledge.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.a. “Artificial Intelligence”.Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://futureoflife.org/cause-area/artificial-intelligence/.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.b. “Our Position on AI”. t.y. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://futureoflife.org/our-position-on-ai/.
  • Future of Life Institute. t.y.c. “Safety Standards Delivering Controllable and Beneficial AI Tools”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://futureoflife.org/document/safety-standards-delivering-controllable-and-beneficial-ai-tools/.
  • Future of Life Institute. 2023. “Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter”. Erişim tarihi 22 Mart 2023. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/.
  • Glendinning, Chellis. 1990. “Notes toward a neo-Luddite manifesto”. Utne Reader 38 (1): 50-53.
  • Guliyev, Hasraddin. 2023. “Artificial intelligence and unemployment in high-tech developed countries: New insights from dynamic panel data model”. Research in Globalization 7:100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100140.
  • Hunt-Bull, Nicholas. 2006. “A neo-luddite manifesto: Or why I do not love robots”. Erişim tarihi 23 Mart 2024. https://cdn.aaai.org/Workshops/2006/WS-06-09/WS06-09-011.pdf.
  • Joffe, Helene. 2011. “Thematic Analysis”. Içinde Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy, 209-23. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119973249.ch15.
  • Johnston, Allen C., ve Merrill Warkentin. 2010. “Fear Appeals and Information Security Behaviors: An Empirical Study”. MIS Quarterly 34 (3): 549-66. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750691.
  • Jones, Steven E. 2013. Against Technology : From the Luddites to Neo-Luddism. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203960455.
  • Kaplan, Alexandra D., Theresa T. Kessler, J. Christopher Brill, ve P. A. Hancock. 2023. “Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Meta-Analytic Findings”. Human Factors 65 (2): 337-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208211013988.
  • Klietmann, Wolfgang F. ve Kathryn L. Ruoff. 2001. “Bioterrorism: Implications for the Clinical Microbiologist”. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 14 (2): 364-81. https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.14.2.364-381.2001.
  • Kronemann, Bianca, Hatice Kizgin, Nripendra Rana ve Yogesh K. Dwivedi. 2023. “How AI encourages consumers to share their secrets? The role of anthropomorphism, personalisation, and privacy concerns and avenues for future research”. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC 27 (1): 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-10-2022-0213.
  • Merchant, Brian. 2023. Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
  • Miles, Matthew B. ve A. Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. California: SAGE.
  • Mittelstadt, Brent. 2019. “Principles Alone Cannot Guarantee Ethical AI”. Nature Machine Intelligence 1 (11): 501-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4.
  • O’Rourke, Kevin Hjortshøj, Ahmed S. Rahman ve Alan M. Taylor. 2013. “Luddites, the Industrial Revolution, and the Demographic Transition”. Journal of Economic Growth 18 (4): 373-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-013-9096-y.
  • PauseAI. t.y.a. “FAQ”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://pauseai.info/faq#who-are-you.
  • PauseAI. t.y.b. “Risks of Artificial Intelligence”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://pauseai.info/risks#fake-news-polarization-and-threatening-democracy.
  • PauseAI. t.y.c. “The Feasibility of a Pause”. Erişim tarihi 20 Mart 2025. https://pauseai.info/feasibility#technical-enforceability-of-a-pause.
  • Pause AI. 2023. “Why We Might Have Superintelligence Sooner than Most Think”. Erişim tarihi 04 Mayıs 2023. https://pauseai.info/urgency#we-reached-human-level-performance-in-many-domains-in-2023.
  • Postel‐Vinay, Fabien. 2002. “The Dynamics of Technological Unemployment*”. International Economic Review 43 (3): 737-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2354.t01-1-00033.
  • Prunkl, Carina. 2024. “Human Autonomy at Risk? An Analysis of the Challenges from AI”. Minds and Machines 34 (3): 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-024-09665-1.
  • Rubinic, Igor, Marija Kurtov, Ivan Rubinic, Robert Likic, Paul I. Dargan ve David M. Wood. 2024. “Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Pharmacology: A Case Study and Scoping Review of Large Language Models and Bioweapon Potential”. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 90 (3): 620-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.15899.
  • Ryan, Mark. 2020. “In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability”. Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (5): 2749-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00228-y.
  • Segment. t.y. “The Growth Report: The AI Edition | Twilio Segment”. Erişim tarihi 12 Ağustos 2024. https://segment.com/the-growth-report/.
  • Sethumadhavan, Arathi. 2019. “Trust in Artificial Intelligence”. Ergonomics in Design 27 (2): 34-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1064804618818592.
  • Siau, Keng ve Weiyu Wang. 2020. “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethics: Ethics of AI and Ethical AI”. Journal of Database Management (JDM) 31 (2): 74-87. https://doi.org/10.4018/JDM.2020040105.
  • Sims, Christopher A. 2013. Tech Anxiety: Artificial Intelligence and Ontological Awakening in Four Science Fiction Novels. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.
  • “State Government Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council Recommended Plan and Framework”. 2024. Oregon.
  • Stop Killer Robots. t.y. “Race and killer robots”. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/race-and-killer-robots/.
  • Stop Killer Robots. 2025. “We Can Stop Killer Robots”. Erişim tarihi 08 Şubat 2025. https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/stop-killer-robots/we-can-stop-killer-robots/.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League. t.y. “Mission, Team and Story”. Erişim tarihi 11 Şubat 2025. https://www.ajl.org/about.
  • The FLI Team. 2023. “FLI on ‘A Statement on AI Risk’ and Next Steps”. Future of Life Institute (blog). 30 Mayıs 2023. https://futureoflife.org/partner-orgs/fli-on-a-statement-on-ai-risk-and-next-steps/.
  • Thormundsson, Bergur. 2024. “Topic: Artificial Intelligence (AI) Worldwide”. Statista. 2024. https://www.statista.com/topics/3104/artificial-intelligence-ai-worldwide/.
  • Urbina, Fabio, Filippa Lentzos, Cédric Invernizzi ve Sean Ekins. 2022. “Dual Use of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Drug Discovery”. Nature Machine Intelligence 4 (3): 189-91. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00465-9.
  • Williams-Grut, Oscar. 2016. “Robots Will Steal Your Job: How AI Could Increase Unemployment and Inequality”. Business Insider. 2016. https://www.businessinsider.com/robots-will-steal-your-job-citi-ai-increase-unemployment-inequality-2016-2.
  • Writers Guild of America. t.y.. “Artificial Intelligence”. Erişim tarihi 27 Şubat 2025. https://www.wga.org/contracts/know-your-rights/artificial-intelligence.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. 2023. “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism”. İçinde Social Theory Re-Wired, 3. bs. New York: Routledge.
There are 55 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Communication Studies, Communication Technology and Digital Media Studies
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Tolga Barman 0000-0001-7938-5780

İrem Çakın 0009-0001-4569-2819

Submission Date March 20, 2025
Acceptance Date November 18, 2025
Publication Date December 5, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 12 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Barman, T., & Çakın, İ. (2025). Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, 12(2), 342-372. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.1662275
AMA Barman T, Çakın İ. Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. December 2025;12(2):342-372. doi:10.24955/ilef.1662275
Chicago Barman, Tolga, and İrem Çakın. “Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist Ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 12, no. 2 (December 2025): 342-72. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.1662275.
EndNote Barman T, Çakın İ (December 1, 2025) Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 12 2 342–372.
IEEE T. Barman and İ. Çakın, “Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi”, Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 342–372, 2025, doi: 10.24955/ilef.1662275.
ISNAD Barman, Tolga - Çakın, İrem. “Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist Ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi 12/2 (December2025), 342-372. https://doi.org/10.24955/ilef.1662275.
JAMA Barman T, Çakın İ. Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. 2025;12:342–372.
MLA Barman, Tolga and İrem Çakın. “Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist Ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi”. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi, vol. 12, no. 2, 2025, pp. 342-7, doi:10.24955/ilef.1662275.
Vancouver Barman T, Çakın İ. Neo-Ludist Hareket Perspektifinden Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Aktivist ve Düzenleyici Reform Hareketlerinin Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlef Dergisi. 2025;12(2):342-7.