This essay explores the challenge of regulating “artificial intelligence” (AI) in democracies. We begin with a careful definition of what is being regulated. In contrast to the relatively narrow focus on technical details of computational tools in many discussions about governing AI, we suggest that it is more useful to identify “AI systems” — embedding not only particular algorithms but design choices structuring human-computer interaction and the allocation of responsibility over decisions — as the appropriate object of regulation. We make the case that even in constitutional democracies, regulation of these systems should often depend primarily on how these systems embed forward-looking “policies” and on the social consequences of such policies, rather than on expecting clear answers to deontologically flavored questions about whether these systems violate “rights,” such as those to privacy or non-discrimination. We then canvas some of the challenges associated with carefully-designed, prudent regulation of AI in democracies. We distinguish here between two types of obstacles, each calling for subtly different evaluations. On the one hand, institutional impediments can frustrate an effective democratic response. These sound in the register of political economy, and the path-dependent aspects of regulatory capacity embodied in national and sub-national institutions. On the other hand, ontological impediments can also complicate regulatory response. By this we mean to capture the sense that AI systems can be constitutive of human subjectivity — shaping attitudes, behaviors, and desires — in ways that make the very project of identifying democratic preferences particularly fraught and subject to subversion. As democratic societies contend with the mix of risks and benefits associated with AI systems, candid acknowledgement of the challenges will bring valuable attention to the endogeneity of democratic preferences and to the characteristics of institutions that have an outsized role in shaping how societies evolve.
{"title":"Toward the Democratic Regulation of AI Systems: A Prolegomenon","authors":"Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Aziz Z Huq","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3671011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3671011","url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores the challenge of regulating “artificial intelligence” (AI) in democracies. We begin with a careful definition of what is being regulated. In contrast to the relatively narrow focus on technical details of computational tools in many discussions about governing AI, we suggest that it is more useful to identify “AI systems” — embedding not only particular algorithms but design choices structuring human-computer interaction and the allocation of responsibility over decisions — as the appropriate object of regulation. We make the case that even in constitutional democracies, regulation of these systems should often depend primarily on how these systems embed forward-looking “policies” and on the social consequences of such policies, rather than on expecting clear answers to deontologically flavored questions about whether these systems violate “rights,” such as those to privacy or non-discrimination. We then canvas some of the challenges associated with carefully-designed, prudent regulation of AI in democracies. We distinguish here between two types of obstacles, each calling for subtly different evaluations. On the one hand, institutional impediments can frustrate an effective democratic response. These sound in the register of political economy, and the path-dependent aspects of regulatory capacity embodied in national and sub-national institutions. On the other hand, ontological impediments can also complicate regulatory response. By this we mean to capture the sense that AI systems can be constitutive of human subjectivity — shaping attitudes, behaviors, and desires — in ways that make the very project of identifying democratic preferences particularly fraught and subject to subversion. As democratic societies contend with the mix of risks and benefits associated with AI systems, candid acknowledgement of the challenges will bring valuable attention to the endogeneity of democratic preferences and to the characteristics of institutions that have an outsized role in shaping how societies evolve.","PeriodicalId":240414,"journal":{"name":"Information Use eJournal","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121653000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Francisco Adrián García García, Adán Morales Pedroza
The studies on digital divide emphasizes two main tenets in the research agenda: ICT access and ICT usage. Our research seeks to analyze the gender digital divide in terms of ICT usage narrowing our focus on internet use in Mexico. Even though the literature has consistently accumulated evidence of the gender-digital-divide existence in many societies, there is work that can be done to shed a bit more light to the subject. One of the ways to do this is keep seeking to generate ever so slightly more precise characterizations of the divide when sociodemographic and economics factors are taken into account. Therefore, this article seeks to tackle the following entangled empirical questions: Is there geographical patterns in mexicans internet usage? In which social, demographic and economic factors hinges Mexico’s use of internet if any? Does differences exists between men and women in internet use frequency? In order to answer these questions, we used Theil's index methodology with internet usage data from Endutih 2017. We found that there are gender differences between adults over 75 years of age, laborers and people with physical or mental limitations to work. We also confirmed a greater digital inequality in the centre-south of the country and that the most important socio-demographic factors for inequality in internet use are education and age.
{"title":"Internet Usage Subnational Disparity Measure in Mexico: A Gender-Digital Divide Approach","authors":"Francisco Adrián García García, Adán Morales Pedroza","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3427579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3427579","url":null,"abstract":"The studies on digital divide emphasizes two main tenets in the research agenda: ICT access and ICT usage. Our research seeks to analyze the gender digital divide in terms of ICT usage narrowing our focus on internet use in Mexico. \u0000 \u0000Even though the literature has consistently accumulated evidence of the gender-digital-divide existence in many societies, there is work that can be done to shed a bit more light to the subject. One of the ways to do this is keep seeking to generate ever so slightly more precise characterizations of the divide when sociodemographic and economics factors are taken into account. \u0000 \u0000Therefore, this article seeks to tackle the following entangled empirical questions: Is there geographical patterns in mexicans internet usage? In which social, demographic and economic factors hinges Mexico’s use of internet if any? Does differences exists between men and women in internet use frequency? \u0000 \u0000In order to answer these questions, we used Theil's index methodology with internet usage data from Endutih 2017. We found that there are gender differences between adults over 75 years of age, laborers and people with physical or mental limitations to work. We also confirmed a greater digital inequality in the centre-south of the country and that the most important socio-demographic factors for inequality in internet use are education and age.","PeriodicalId":240414,"journal":{"name":"Information Use eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125396369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This chapter analyzes the recognition that has the Information Literacy –IL/INFOLIT–, the Information Competencies Training, in policies of general education, university and information technologies and communication, in the Ibero-American context. To identify the recognition of this issue in these areas and context, we performed a content analysis of 80 documents related to these policies, published between 1995 and today. The result shows that in non-librarian’s context, which would be closely related to information literacy, such as educational, university and ICT is not yet strong that presence, judging from the documents that guide the policies of our countries. This problematic situation, then supposed, a great opportunity for librarians, libraries, schools of librarianship and documentation, are positioned more on this subject, based on a comprehensive vision and multiliteracies led by UNESCO in recent years, with a prospective significant.
{"title":" Reconocimiento y posibilidades de la alfabetización informacional en políticas de educación, universitarias y de TIC con influencia en Iberoamérica. (Recognition and Possibilities of Information Literacy in Education, University and ICT Policies With Influence in Latin America.)","authors":"Alejandro Uribe-Tirado, María Pinto","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3478142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3478142","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter analyzes the recognition that has the Information Literacy –IL/INFOLIT–, the Information Competencies Training, in policies of general education, university and information technologies and communication, in the Ibero-American context. To identify the recognition of this issue in these areas and context, we performed a content analysis of 80 documents related to these policies, published between 1995 and today. \u0000 \u0000The result shows that in non-librarian’s context, which would be closely related to information literacy, such as educational, university and ICT is not yet strong that presence, judging from the documents that guide the policies of our countries. \u0000 \u0000This problematic situation, then supposed, a great opportunity for librarians, libraries, schools of librarianship and documentation, are positioned more on this subject, based on a comprehensive vision and multiliteracies led by UNESCO in recent years, with a prospective significant.","PeriodicalId":240414,"journal":{"name":"Information Use eJournal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115324499","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：