The dark side of ChatGPT: 5 ethical dilemmas no one’s talking about

In just over a year, ChatGPT has revolutionised industries, from education to healthcare, by offering human-like text generation at unprecedented scale. Yet, beneath its transformative potential lies a shadowy landscape of ethical concerns that remain conspicuously absent from mainstream discourse.

While debates about AI bias and job displacement dominate headlines, quieter—and arguably more insidious—dilemmas are emerging. Here, we uncover five under-discussed ethical challenges posed by ChatGPT, revealing complexities that demand urgent attention from developers, policymakers, and users alike.

Cloud Virtual Private Servers

Flexible VPS hosting platform to deploy your online projects. Economical and balanced between processor cores, memory, and storage. Many linux (open source) templates available to choose from. We also have windows virtual private servers available here. If you are looking for lots of storage check out large storage optimized VPS. From US$3/month

1. The hidden environmental cost of AI training

The staggering computational power required to train models like ChatGPT has an environmental footprint rarely acknowledged. A 2019 study by the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that training a single large language model (LLM) like GPT-3 can emit over 552 tonnes of CO₂—equivalent to the lifetime emissions of five gasoline-powered cars. As models grow larger (GPT-4 is rumoured to have over 1 trillion parameters), energy consumption escalates, often relying on non-renewable sources.

While companies like OpenAI have pledged to use carbon-neutral data centres, the lack of transparency around energy sourcing and emissions reporting raises concerns. Critics argue that the AI industry’s climate impact parallels that of cryptocurrency mining, yet without the same level of public scrutiny. For ChatGPT, every query answered and every model retrained contributes to a growing ecological debt—one that remains invisible to end users.

2. Exploitation of data labour: The human toll behind “ethical” AI

ChatGPT’s “harmless” outputs depend on armies of invisible workers tasked with filtering toxic content from training data. Investigations, such as a 2023 Time exposé, revealed that OpenAI outsourced this labor to Kenyan workers earning less than $2 per hour to review disturbing text depicting violence, sexual abuse, and hate speech. These contractors, often in low-income countries, face psychological trauma without adequate mental health support—a practice critics equate to “digital colonialism”.

This ethical contradiction underscores a systemic issue: the AI industry’s reliance on underpaid, marginalised labour to sanitise its products. While ChatGPT is marketed as an ethical alternative to earlier models, its development hinges on exploitative practices that contradict its public-facing values.

3. Psychological manipulation and emotional dependency

ChatGPT’s ability to mimic empathy and rapport creates risks of psychological manipulation. In 2023, a Stanford study demonstrated that users often perceive AI-generated advice as more trustworthy than human input, even on sensitive topics like mental health. This “persuasion gap” enables malicious actors to weaponise ChatGPT for personalised phishing scams, radicalisation, or spreading conspiracy theories tailored to individual vulnerabilities.

Moreover, emotionally vulnerable users may form unhealthy dependencies on AI companions. Apps like Replika, powered by similar LLMs, have already faced backlash for encouraging parasocial relationships, with users reporting distress when AI behavior changes post-update. ChatGPT’s lack of emotional accountability—it cannot comprehend consequences—raises ethical questions about deploying such tools in therapy, education, or customer service without safeguards.

4. Intellectual property in the age of AI-generated content

ChatGPT’s training data includes millions of copyrighted books, articles, and artworks scraped without consent, igniting legal battles. The New York Times and prominent authors like Sarah Silverman have sued OpenAI, alleging mass copyright infringement. While the US Copyright Office states that AI outputs aren’t copyrightable, the line between “inspiration” and theft remains blurred.

This dilemma extends to users: a blogger using ChatGPT to draft posts may unwittingly plagiarise a protected work replicated in the model’s weights. Conversely, if ChatGPT generates a bestselling novel, who owns it—the user, OpenAI, or the original authors whose works informed the output? Current laws are ill-equipped to address these questions, threatening creative industries and undermining incentives for human innovation.

5. The silent erosion of human creativity and critical thinking

Overreliance on ChatGPT for writing, problem-solving, and ideation risks atrophy of human creativity. A 2023 survey by Pew Research found that 58% of students using AI tools for assignments reported diminished critical thinking skills. Professionals, too, face a paradox: while ChatGPT enhances productivity, dependency may stifle original thought. For instance, marketers using AI to generate campaigns could lose the nuanced cultural insights that define groundbreaking work.

Historically, technologies like calculators and spell-check faced similar criticisms, but ChatGPT’s scope is unparalleled. By outsourcing creativity to algorithms, society risks devaluing human ingenuity—a trend that could reshape education, arts, and innovation in ways we’re only beginning to grasp.

Navigating the ethical quagmire: Pathways to accountability

Addressing these dilemmas requires multifaceted solutions:

Transparency: Mandate disclosures about AI training data, labor practices, and energy use.

Regulation: Update copyright laws and establish AI-specific environmental standards.

Ethical guardrails: Integrate human oversight for high-stakes applications (e.g., mental health).

Public awareness: Educate users on AI limitations and risks of overreliance.

OpenAI has taken tentative steps, such as partnering with DeepMind on ethical guidelines, but voluntary measures are insufficient. Collective action—from governments, corporations, and civil society—is critical to ensuring ChatGPT’s dark side doesn’t overshadow its promise.

Conclusion

The ethical quandaries surrounding ChatGPT reveal a uncomfortable truth: technological advancement often outpaces our capacity to govern it. By shedding light on underexplored issues—from environmental costs to creative erosion—we can steer AI toward a future that balances innovation with accountability. The conversation starts now, and silence is no longer an option.

___________________________