A win for security is a loss for privacy?
The UN is moving to fight cybercrime but privacy groups say human rights will be violated
A global deal on the criminal use of computer technology is moving ahead despite worries it will let governments around the world violate human rights by probing electronic communications and bypassing privacy safeguards.
Nearly 200 nations approved the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on Thursday afternoon at a special committee meeting that capped months of complicated negotiations. The treaty — expected to win General Assembly approval within months — creates a framework for nations to cooperate against internet-related crimes including the illegal access and interception of computer information; electronic eavesdropping and online child sex abuse.
… Many cited examples of probable downsides like the case against Rappler, an online Philippine news outlet that angered former President Rodrigo Duterte by reporting critically on his deadly crackdown on illegal drugs and alarming human rights record. Founded by 2021 Nobel Peace Prize co-winner Maria Ressa, libertarians said the site is the type that will become vulnerable around the world thanks to the new treaty but advocates including the Biden administration said the deal reflects the interests of the U.S. and its allies.
It balances privacy concerns with the need for every country to pursue criminal activity around the world, the Biden administration said.
Perspective.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08989621.2024.2386285
Is AI my co-author? The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific publishing
The recent emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) and other forms of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has led people to wonder whether they could act as an author on a scientific paper. This paper argues that AI systems should not be included on the author by-line. We agree with current commentators that LLMs are incapable of taking responsibility for their work and thus do not meet current authorship guidelines. We identify other problems with responsibility and authorship. In addition, the problems go deeper as AI tools also do not write in a meaningful sense nor do they have persistent identities. From a broader publication ethics perspective, adopting AI authorship would have detrimental effects on an already overly competitive and stressed publishing ecosystem. Deterrence is possible as backward-looking tools will likely be able to identify past AI usage. Finally, we question the value of using AI to produce more research simply for publication’s sake.
No comments:
Post a Comment