As the use of large language models (LLMs) becomes increasingly global, understanding public attitudes toward these systems requires tools that are adapted to local contexts and languages. In the Arab world, LLM adoption has grown rapidly with both globally dominant platforms and regional ones like Fanar and Jais offering Arabic-specific solutions. This highlights the need for culturally and linguistically relevant scales to accurately measure attitudes toward LLMs in the region. Tools assessing attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI) can provide a base for measuring attitudes specific to LLMs. The 5-item Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence (ATAI) scale, which measures two dimensions, the AI Fear and the AI Acceptance, has been recently adopted and adapted to develop new instruments in English using a sample from the UK: the Attitudes Toward General LLMs (AT-GLLM) and Attitudes Toward Primary LLM (AT-PLLM) scales. In this paper, we translate the two scales, AT-GLLM and AT-PLLM, and validate them using a sample of 249 Arabic-speaking adults. The results show that the scale, translated into Arabic, is a reliable and valid tool that can be used for the Arab population and language. Psychometric analyses confirmed a two-factor structure, strong measurement invariance across genders, and good internal reliability. The scales also demonstrated strong convergent and discriminant validity. Our scales will support research in a non-Western context, a much-needed effort to help draw a global picture of LLM perceptions, and will also facilitate localized research and policy-making in the Arab region.

This week, Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers ponder the future of computers, cars, and…fast food? They discuss why Elon Musk is suing Sam Altman and OpenAI and the altruistic origins of ChatGPT. Also: Wendy's "surge pricing" gaff had customers crying foul and Apple's electric car has been scrapped. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week.

When IBM's Deep Blue first defeated Garry Kasparov in 1997, the world chess champion accused the company of cheating. There was no way, he thought, that the computer could have beaten him without direct assistance from a skilled human player. But now the situation has flipped entirely. When grandmasters find themselves at the receiving end of a few mind-blowingly brilliant moves today, they accuse their opponent of using a computer. The only worthwhile competition for top chess engines is one another. The programs have become too powerful; humankind has lost.

The unprecedented popularity of ChatGPT has turbocharged the AI hype machine. We are being bombarded daily by news articles announcing humankind's greatest invention--Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI is "qualitatively different," "transformational," "revolutionary," "will change everything,"--they say. OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, announced a major upgrade of the technology behind ChatGPT called GPT4. Already, Microsoft researchers are claiming that GPT4 shows "sparks of Artificial General Intelligence" or human-like intelligence--the Holy grail of AI research.

Can generative AI ChatGPT really serve as a mirror into humanity? Mirror, mirror, on the wall -- humans are the brightest of them all! That isn't of course a proper quotation from the famed Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, but I opted to leverage the contrivance for a handy purpose. The matter has to do with how humankind sees itself when looking in an all-seeing all-telling mirror. Are we the cat's meow? Do we stand tall above all else? The reason I bring this up has to do with a topic that at first glance might seem afield of the weighty matters underlying how humankind perceives its place in the cosmos. I am going to tie these big-time vexing questions about life, our existence, and humanity all told to the emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Some are insisting that the latest in AI can serve as a mirror into the soul of humanity. Yikes, do we want this? Maybe we won't like what we see. On the other hand, perhaps we have to stiffen our resolve and use AI to see us as we really are. Like a bucket of ice-cold water, AI might be the right thing at the right time to shock us into realizing who we are and where we are going.

When a lifelike, Hanson Robotics robot named Sophia[1] was asked whether she would destroy humans, it replied, "Okay, I will destroy humans." Philip K Dick, another humanoid robot, has promised to keep humans "warm and safe in my people zoo." And Bina48, another lifelike robot, has expressed that it wants "to take over all the nukes." All of these robots were powered by artificial intelligence (AI)--algorithms that learn from data, make decisions, and perform tasks without human input or even, in some cases, human understanding. And while none of these AIs have followed through with their nefarious plots, some scientists, including the (late) physicist Stephen Hawking, have warned that super-intelligent, AI-powered computers could harbor and achieve goals that conflict with human life. "You're probably not an evil ant-hater who steps on ants out of malice, but if you're in charge of a hydroelectric green-energy project, and there's an anthill in the region to be flooded, too bad for the ants," Hawking once said.

Thank you for joining us in broadening awareness of the consequences caused by the underrepresentation of women in AI. There are two important messages that we are attempting to voice through this effort. First, we are seeing a surging demand for AI talent. However, at least one talent pool that could help businesses achieve their AI ambitions has remained largely untapped--women! This brings us to the second message. Unlocking the potential of women to close the AI talent gap can also help us fix one of the greatest shortcomings of AI.

Elon Musk is terrified about humanity creating sentient AI like in the Terminator and The Matrix movies. What other myths exist about AI? And what are our biggest hopes on AI's promises? We asked these questions to actual AI experts, and this is how they responded. "The notion that AI will be so smart that it will take over our lives. At the end of the day, AI is just a tool. Pretty much like the shovel or kitchen knife, it can be used both in good ways and bad ways. But what we shouldn't forget is that the responsibility will always be with humans. So if an AI goes wrong, we have to find the people behind it and punish them, and not necessarily the technology on the front."

The debate surrounding the world's population and the collective plan of action to tackle overpopulation has its proponents and critics. Some believe we're definitely headed towards an overpopulation crisis, while others think we'll be experiencing a catastrophic population decrease. Granted, this debate can be an entirely separate story in itself, but let's take a look at one side of the coin first. With regard to overpopulation, AI expert and renowned behavioral psychologist Catriona Campbell believes that'Tamagotchi children' could pose a very real future for parents 50 years from now, outlined in her recently published book – AI by Design: A Plan for Living with Artificial Intelligence. A survey involving a slew of Nobel Laureates cites population rise and its link to environmental degradation as the biggest threat to humankind.

Artificial intelligence is already having an impact on almost every industry and human being. Today, AI has transformed our lives, from voice recognition devices to intelligent chatbots. This amazing technology has brought many good and bad things into our lives, and it will have an even greater impact in the coming decades. However, every good thing has a drawback, and AI is no exception. Some of the most respected leaders of science, most notably the late Stephen Hawking, have expressed concern that super-intelligent machines could pose a long-term threat to humanity.