An
explainable algorithm would be useful to both sides. Can it be done?
(Is the law entirely logical?)
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3985553
Antitrust
by Algorithm
Technological
innovation is changing private markets around the world. New
advances in digital technology have created new opportunities for
subtle and evasive forms of anticompetitive behavior by private
firms. But some of these same technological advances could also help
antitrust regulators improve their performance. We foresee that the
growing digital complexity of the marketplace will necessitate that
antitrust authorities increasingly rely on machine-learning
algorithms to oversee market behavior. In making this transition,
authorities will need to meet several key institutional
challenges—building organizational capacity, avoiding legal
pitfalls, and establishing public trust—to ensure successful
implementation of antitrust by algorithm.
Lawyers
defending AI?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8660862/
Protecting
Sentient Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Lay Intuitions on
Standing, Personhood, and General Legal Protection
To
what extent, if any, should the law protect sentient artificial
intelligence (that is, AI that can feel pleasure or pain)? Here we
surveyed United States adults (n = 1,061) on their views regarding
granting 1) general legal protection, 2) legal personhood, and 3)
standing to bring forth a lawsuit, with respect to sentient AI and
eight other groups: humans in the jurisdiction, humans outside the
jurisdiction, corporations, unions, non-human animals, the
environment, humans living in the near future, and humans living in
the far future. Roughly
one-third of participants endorsed granting personhood and standing
to sentient AI (assuming its existence) in at least some cases,
the lowest of any group surveyed on, and rated the desired level of
protection for sentient AI as lower than all groups other than
corporations. We further investigated and observed political
differences in responses; liberals
were more likely to endorse legal protection and personhood for
sentient AI than conservatives. Taken together, these
results suggest that laypeople are not by-and-large in favor of
granting legal protection to AI, and that the ordinary conception of
legal status, similar to codified legal doctrine, is not based on a
mere capacity to feel pleasure and pain. At the same time, the
observed political differences suggest that previous literature
regarding political differences in empathy and moral circle expansion
apply to artificially intelligent systems and extend partially,
though not entirely, to legal consideration, as well.
(Related)
https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198857815.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780198857815-e-3
The
Ethics of Human–Robot Interaction and Traditional Moral Theories
The
rapid introduction of different kinds of robots and other machines
with artificial intelligence into different domains of life raises
the question of whether robots can be moral agents and moral
patients. In other words, can
robots perform moral actions? Can robots be on the
receiving end of moral actions? To explore these questions, this
chapter relates the new area of the ethics of human–robot
interaction to traditional ethical theories such as utilitarianism,
Kantian ethics, and virtue ethics. These theories were developed
with the assumption that the paradigmatic examples of moral agents
and moral patients are human beings. As this chapter argues, this
creates challenges for anybody who wishes to extend the traditional
ethical theories to new questions of whether robots can be moral
agents and/or moral patients.
My
human is a good human, he told me so himself.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3982051
AI
Being Used To Explicate The Reputations Of Human Lawyers
Lawyers
are apt to care quite a bit about their professional reputations. An
attorney with a stellar legal reputation can presumably glean rewards
accordingly, while an attorney with a dour reputation might find
their legal career stinted. To ascertain the reputation of a lawyer,
some are turning to AI as a means of ferreting out and essentially
explicating the standing and repute of human attorneys. This use of
AI is either welcomed or at times considered contemptible.
Wait
for AI to tell us what is ethical?
https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/72057
Artificial
intelligence: «experimental philosophy» or a requirement of
reality?
The
power of information already exists in the world. Discussions about
the formation of a «new social order», the philosophy of computer
civilization, the methods of influencing the latest information and
communication technologies on human life, the psychological and
socio-economic consequences of total computerization of the
globalized world, the latest ways and means solving the many problems
that arise. The critical
challenges facing humanity already exceed the intellectual
capabilities of Homo sapiens to solve them. There is an
urgent need to create high-performance universal computers that can
reason and perform operations at the level of human intelligence or
even surpass it, including critical thinking and creativity. It is
about creating the so-called «artificial intelligence» (AI).
However, this invention may in the future become a source of
potential danger to human civilization, because without being a
social being, artificial intelligence will function outside of human
ethics, morality, psychology. Reasons to worry about the world's
fascination with artificial intelligence are very real. No one can
predict the consequences of the integration of superintelligence into
society. The article analyzes the problem of creating AI and the
social risks that may arise. The purpose of the study is due to the
need for a deeper understanding of the essence of the concept of
«artificial intelligence» and the identification of those tasks
that it can solve in the field of mass communications and social
relations.
Starting
to see more articles on facial recognition.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-90256-8_2
Facial
Recognition and Privacy Rights
Biometric
facial recognition is one of the most rapidly developing methods of
biometric identification, with expanding applications across law
enforcement, government and the private sector. Its capacity for
integration with other technologies, such as closed circuit
television (CCTV) and social media, differentiate it from DNA and
fingerprint biometric identification. This chapter commences with a
discussion of the technique of facial recognition and applications in
identity verification, public surveillance, and the identification of
unknown suspects. Its relative advantages and disadvantages, and the
development of facial recognition around the world is explored. The
discussion then examines how facial recognition databases developed
from existing databases, such as driver’s licence photographs, can
be integrated with CCTV systems, and most recently, with photographs
from social media and the internet. The chapter then considers
relevant ethical principles, including privacy, autonomy, security
and public safety, and the implications for law and regulation in
relation to facial recognition.
(Related)
https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=997688
Assessment
of the European legal framework of facial recognition technology
In an era where half of our face is hidden by a
mask, facial recognition technology keeps improving. Despite the
opportunities it represents in many fields, this innovative
technology is far from winning unanimous support among European
citizens and right advocates. Between abuses of use, security drifts
and privacy breaches; many risks have been pointed out. The European
Union institutions are thus increasingly aware of the importance to
provide facial recognition with its own legal framework, so that it
is no longer governed solely by the broader framework of data
protection legislation.
