Considerable advancements have been made in various NLP tasks based on the impressive power of large language models (LLMs) and many NLP applications are deployed in our daily lives. In this work, we challenge the capability of LLMs with the new task of Ethical Quandary Generative Question Answering. Ethical quandary questions are more challenging to address because multiple conflicting answers may exist to a single quandary. We explore the current capability of LLMs in providing an answer with a deliberative exchange of different perspectives to an ethical quandary, in the approach of Socratic philosophy, instead of providing a closed answer like an oracle. We propose a model that searches for different ethical principles applicable to the ethical quandary and generates an answer conditioned on the chosen principles through prompt-based few-shot learning. We also discuss the remaining challenges and ethical issues involved in this task and suggest the direction toward developing responsible NLP systems by incorporating human values explicitly.

Waging brutal repression at home and allegedly helping Russia in its war against Ukraine, Iran is becoming an unsolvable challenge for Western powers eager to avoid a new nuclear power in the Middle East. "We're in a delicate situation and an obvious impasse," a French diplomat admitted before Wednesday's UN Security Council meeting on suspected Iranian drone use by Russian forces. Despite Tehran's new support for an increasingly isolated Moscow, the United States and the European Union still hope to revive the 2015 deal aimed at curtailing Iran's nuclear programme -- even though the prospect is dimming. "Iran's repression at home and aggression in Ukraine have increased the political cost for and decreased the appetite of the West to grant Tehran sanctions relief," said analyst Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group. "But the West has no good options, as the only thing worse than a repressive regime that kills its own people is a nuclear armed one that does so."

Got a moral quandary you don't know how to solve? Why not turn to the wisdom of artificial intelligence, aka Ask Delphi: an intriguing research project from the Allen Institute for AI that offers answers to ethical dilemmas while demonstrating in wonderfully clear terms why we shouldn't trust software with questions of morality. Ask Delphi was launched on October 14th, along with a research paper describing how it was made. From a user's point of view, though, the system is beguilingly simple to use. Just head to the website, outline pretty much any situation you can think of, and Delphi will come up with a moral judgement. Since Ask Delphi launched, its nuggets of wisdom have gone viral in news stories and on social media.

Prologue: This is not an introduction to AI or AI in education. You can find these here and here, respectively. Rather, this is a constellation of positions on AI from an educator's perspective. I pull together disparate aspects of current debates about AI and education in order to articulate some directions for the field. Lately I've been sitting in rooms with a lot of thoughtful people from industry, different disciplines in academia, and policy backgrounds to think through artificial intelligence (AI) and education.

You wake up on a bus, surrounded by all your remaining possessions. A few fellow passengers slump on pale blue seats around you, their heads resting against the windows. You turn and see a father holding his son. But one man, with a salt-and-pepper beard and khaki vest, stands near the back of the bus, staring at you. You feel uneasy and glance at the driver, wondering if he would help you if you needed it. When you turn back around, the bearded man has moved toward you and is now just a few feet away.

Last November Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced the birth of twin babies whose germline he claimed to have altered to reduce their susceptibility to contracting HIV. The news of embryo editing and gene-edited babies prompted immediate condemnation both within and beyond the scientific community. An ABC News headline asked: "Genetically edited babies--scientific advancement or playing God?" The answer may be "both." He's application of gene-editing technology to human embryos flouted norms of scientific transparency and oversight, but even less controversial scientific developments sometimes provoke the reaction that humans are overstepping their appropriate sphere of influence.

Australian bioethicist Julian Savulescu has a knack for provocation. He says most of us would readily accept it if it benefited us. As for eugenics--creating smarter, stronger, more beautiful babies--he believes we have an ethical obligation to use advanced technology to select the best possible children. A protégé of the philosopher Peter Singer, Savulescu is a prominent moral philosopher at the University of Oxford, where he directs the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics. He sees nothing wrong with doping to help cyclists climb those steep mountains in the Tour de France. Some elite athletes will always cheat to boost their performance, so instead of trying to enforce rules that will be broken, he claims we'd be better off with a system that allows low-dose doping. So does Savulescu just get off being outrageous? "I actually think of myself as the voice of common sense," he says, though he admits to receiving his share of hate mail.

Clever computers that learn on the job could recast Britain's job market - for better or worse. What are the parties vying for power in the general election saying on the subject? Twenty-nine-year-old Lee Hayhow is the third generation of his family to work as a lorry driver, following his father and grandfather. He is proud of his job. "I've always enjoyed lorries and driving. I trained as a professional driver. I always do it to the best of my ability. He estimates it costs £3,000 to train as a heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) driver. Mr Hayhow's employer, O'Donovan Waste Disposal, paid for this, but not all firms do, he says. And he would be delighted to see the next generation of Hayhows - his two young daughters - follow his career path. But by then, the decision may not be theirs to take. Lorry driving, like many other jobs that help power the British economy, could be facing a huge shake-up. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) - a field of computer science in which machines are taught to carry out tasks that require human traits of thought or intelligence - have led some to predict a knock-on catastrophe for jobs. Nowhere is the exponential growth of AI more apparent than in the race towards self-driving vehicles. There have been stark warnings about its impact on the jobs market as computer programs are honed to perform a number of roles, including call centre work, banking and paralegal responsibilities, retail and catering tasks, and journalism. Up to 46% of jobs in Scotland could be at risk within the next decade, the Institute for Public Policy Research Scotland recently claimed. Accountancy firm PwC predicted 30% of existing jobs in the UK could be "at high risk of automation" by the 2030s. Calum Chace, author of Surviving AI and the Economic Singularity, foresees "quite a lot" of unemployment caused by the takeover of technology "in a decade and a lot in two decades". "The industrial revolution was mechanisation and humans had something else to offer - cognitive skills.