An act of war, but let’s not call it that for political reasons.
Lloyd’s to Exclude Catastrophic Nation-Backed Cyberattacks From Insurance Coverage
By 2023, insurer groups must add clauses to cyber policies excluding state-backed hacks that severely affect target nation’s infrastructure, insurance marketplace says
… At a minimum, Mr. Chaudhry said, policies must contain clauses that exclude losses arising from a war, declared or otherwise, where the policy doesn’t have a separate war exclusion. They must also exclude losses where a state-backed attack has a catastrophic effect on the target nation and impairs its ability to function. There must also be a robust process by which parties decide attribution for attacks, according to the notice.
… While exclusions for openly declared war are relatively straightforward, determining attribution for a nation-backed cyberattack is fraught with difficulty. For instance, drawing a line between when a criminal group is simply acting in support of a nation, or actually operating as a state agent, is a challenge, U.S. officials have previously said. Brokers said that determining the degree of damage caused by an attack, which would trigger the exclusions, is similarly tough.
A discussion we must have.
https://nru.uncst.go.ug/handle/123456789/4277
Legal Personhood of Artificial Intelligence
With the rise of AI, artistic creation of content is no longer a purely human enterprise. Currently works made by AI are considered to be computer assisted or aided works and copyright/patent right is vested in the human being who uses Al as a tool. However, questions have arisen as who owns the copyright/patent right in AI-generated works where there is no human input. Is it the inventor of the AI? The owner of the AI (Who may not be the inventor)? Or might the AI be given a certain degree of legal subject status and thus have its own rights? Section 4 of the Copyrights and Neighbouring Rights Act, 20061 provides that the author of any work specified in section 5 shall have a right of protection of the work, where work is original and is reduced to material form in whatever method irrespective of quality of the work or the purpose for which it is created. Section 17 of the Industrial Property Act 20142 provides that the right to a patent belongs to the inventor. Section 17 of the same Act provides that where two or more persons have jointly made an invention the right to the patent belongs to them jointly. It remains unclear who the author or inventor of a work or invention by an AI will be.
What it is and may be?
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-13870-6_51
Legal Analysis of the Right to Privacy Protection in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
The rise of artificial intelligence has had many impacts on the existing society, among which the right to privacy is a social issue worthy of attention. A large amount of personal information, especially personal privacy, is collected from multiple sources, passed through a back-room operation, and then combined, as a new source of value, it also poses a great threat to the security of citizens’ right of privacy. Individual citizens face not only this direct link between Internet service providers such as Baidu, but also the fact that behind the web, the individual citizen is also indirectly related to many subjects in the data industry chain, such as the data broker, the data producer, and so on.
This paper is divided into three parts: the first part introduces the overview of the right to privacy; the second part analyzes the challenges of the protection of the right to privacy in the age of artificial intelligence, including the expanding scope of the object of the right to privacy, the severity of the consequences of the infringement, the new changes in the way of infringement, the accountability of infringement is more difficult; The third part puts forward the countermeasures to improve the protection of privacy in the age of artificial intelligence, improve the existing privacy laws and regulations, standardize the legal system, strengthen the industry self-discipline, strengthen international cooperation.
If not wiser, more encompassing.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-022-00204-1
Privacy without persons: a Buddhist critique of surveillance capitalism
Much has been written about artificial intelligence (AI) perpetuating social inequity and disenfranchising marginalized groups (Barocas in SSRN J, 2016; Goodman in Law and Ethics of AI, 2017; Buolamwini and Gebru in Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, 2018). It is a sad irony that virtually all of these critiques are exclusively couched in concepts and theories from the Western philosophical tradition (Algorithm Watch in AI ethics guidelines global inventory, 2021; Goffi in Sapiens, 2021). In particular, Buddhist philosophy is, with a few notable exceptions (Hongladarom in A Buddhist Theory of Privacy, Springer, Singapore, 2016; Hongladarom in The Ethics of AI and Robotics A Buddhist Viewpoint, Lexington Book, Maryland, 2020; Hongladarom in MIT Technology Review, 2021; Lin et al. in Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications fo Robotics, MIT, Cambridge, 2012; Promta and Einar Himma in J Inf Commun Ethics Soc 6(2):172–187, 2008), completely ignored. This inattention to non-Western philosophy perpetuates a pernicious form of intellectual imperialism (Alatas in Southeast Asian J Soc Sci 28(1):23–45, 2000), and deprives the field of vital intellectual resources. The aim of this article is twofold: to introduce Buddhist concepts and arguments to an unfamiliar audience and to demonstrate how those concepts can be fruitfully deployed within the field of AI ethics. In part one, I develop a Buddhist inspired critique of two propositions about privacy: that the scope of privacy is defined by an essential connection between certain types of information and personal identity (i.e., what makes a person who they are), and that privacy is intrinsically valuable as a part of human dignity (Council of the European Union in Position of the Council on General Data Protection Regulation, 2016). The Buddhist doctrine of not self (anattā) rejects the existence of a stable and essential self. According to this view, persons are fictions and questions of personal identity have no ultimate answer. From a Buddhist perspective, the scope and value of privacy are entirely determined by contextual norms—nothing is intrinsically private nor is privacy intrinsically valuable (Nissenbaum in Theor Inq Law 20(1):221–256, 2019). In part two, I show how this shift in perspective reveals a new critique of surveillance capitalism (Zuboff in J Inf Technol 30(1):75–89, 2015). While other ethical analyses of surveillance capitalism focus on its scale and scope of illegitimate data collection, I examine the relationship between targeted advertising and what Buddhism holds to be the three causes of suffering: ignorance, craving and aversion. From a Buddhist perspective, the foremost reason to be wary of surveillance capitalism is not that it depends on systematic violations of our privacy, but that it systematically distorts and perverts the true nature of reality, instilling a fundamentally misguided and corrupting conception of human flourishing. Privacy, it turns out, may be a red herring to the extent that critiques of surveillance capitalism frame surveillance, rather than capitalism, as the primary object of concern. A Buddhist critique, however, reveals that surveillance capitalism is merely the latest symptom of a deeper disease.
Tools & Techniques. Be sure to test this! I don’t trust redaction tools.
https://www.makeuseof.com/windows-pdf-redactor-guide/
How to Hide Sensitive Information in a PDF With PDF Redactor for Windows
When sending a PDF, you sometimes need to hide some sensitive information that you don't want others to see. And if you need to do this constantly, it helps to have an easy way of going about it. If you’re on Windows, you can use a free program called PDF Redactor to redact PDFs quickly.
Here is how to download and use PDF Redactor on Windows to hide sensitive information.
No comments:
Post a Comment