The hidden cost of digital twins: Who owns your identity? |
Digital twins technology is becoming an increasingly prominent reality driven by multiple tech companies.
The “Digital Me” technology was pioneered by Richard Skellett with the development of “Digital Richard”. What makes this AI twin different from the real Richard is its confinement to a screen, otherwise Digital Richard knows everything Skellet knows.
Having been trained on Skellett’s specific data, meetings, and work style, the digital twin serves as a vital professional partner.
It also helps Skellett in managing personal life, such as handling personal "off-limits" administrative tasks and family schedules.
The core argument of the companies behind building digital twins is based on increased productivity while turning the average worker into a “superworker.”
For instance, leaders like Josh Bersin, the founder and CEO of The Josh Bersin Company, reports that increased productivity from AI twins has allowed for higher staff bonuses and 30 percent annual growth with minimal hiring.
"People don't have the energy to have another conference call to talk about this and that. But you can wake the digital twin up in the middle of the night and talk to it for an hour - it doesn't care. It's incredibly valuable," Bersin said.
Moreover, the Digital Me technology which is trained on an individual’s meetings, documents, and unique problem-solving methods, allows employees to amplify their output, leading to the belief that hourly rate is becoming irrelevant. Employees also used these twins for phased retirements and coverage during maternity leave.
Who owns these AI replicas: employers or employees?
Besides rewriting the rules of productivity, these AI replicas have sparked an ethical debate regarding ownership and identity theft.
There is a fundamental disagreement between industry leaders on who owns a digital twin. Richard Skellett argues that individuals should own their twins to protect their identity, likeness and value with companies “renting access.”
On the other hand, Bersin argued that digital twins are the properties of the business as these are trained on company data and IP. Once the employees leave the company, their clone value may also decline.
Kaelyn Lowmaster, a research director in Gartner's HR practice, focused on the impact of AI on work and the workforce, said, “There are real potential benefits for sure, but it depends on getting the governance right, the direction of free time right, the autonomy of these agents right, and making sure that my name, image and likeness still stays mine, even if my employer is benefiting from it.”
"The moment an AI tool is trained on an individual's emails, meetings and work product, you're dealing with issues that sit right at the heart of the employment relationship: consent, control of personal data, performance, substitution of labour,” Anjali Malik, an associate at Bellevue Law, which specialises in employment law and commercial disputes, argued.
Blurring the line between productivity and identity
The emergence of AI replicas is also responsible for blurring the line between productivity and identity theft.
What remains of a person, when a digital twin can easily mimic his response, creativity, problem-solving ability, and judgement.
This points to an ethical dilemma, turning the humans mere into data points and depriving them of their distinct identities shaped by unique and hands-on experiences.
Governance and legal challenges
The digital twins landscape is also fraught with legal and governance challenges. It remains unclear who is responsible if a digital twin makes a significant professional mistake or a legal error.
Legal experts also highlight concerns regarding the control of personal data and the "substitution of labor." Moreover, the current employment laws are not equipped for AI twins. As per experts, in future, the employment tribunals will set the legal standards to handle wrongful dismissal cases related to AI actions.