弥合南非智能和互联技术造成的监管差距

IF 0.5 Q4 MEDICAL ETHICS South African Journal of Bioethics and Law Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i2.201
M. Botes, B. Townsend
{"title":"弥合南非智能和互联技术造成的监管差距","authors":"M. Botes, B. Townsend","doi":"10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i2.201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\n\nThe prevalence of technology-embedded products, services, and cities, described colloquially as ‘smart’ technologies and ‘smart’ cities, has seen a spate of unprecedented growth in recent years. South Africa (SA) has not been left behind, with smartphones, smart watches, and smart voice-controlled virtual personal assistants such as Amazon’s Alexa now frequently used. But while these technologies hold great promise to revolutionise homes, offices and cities, their adoption poses challenges to individual and collective interests and wellbeing. After demonstrating the legal and ethical difficulties brought about by the introduction of these technologies, this article explores whether SA legislation is sufficiently robust to address these challenges. While the current legislative landscape addresses certain crucial difficulties – such as the safeguarding of personal data by the Protection of Personal Information Act No. 4 of 2013 (‘POPIA’) – it is suggested that the position regulating other aspects of smart technology adoption is, in large part, fragmented and ill-equipped to deal with some of the more pressing legal and ethical questions. Our contention is that, not dissimilar to the issues arising from artificial intelligence-based technological adoption, the extant legislative and regulatory frameworks do not go far enough in addressing the many concerns emerging from recent novel technological design, development, and deployment. Not only do smart technologies give rise to unique challenges, so does their deployment within the Global South and in South Africa, in particular. We suggest that appropriate and effective regulatory reform measures be undertaken in SA to provide better ethical guidance and policy prescriptions buttressed by rigorous regulatory oversight.\n\n\n\n","PeriodicalId":43498,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bridging the regulatory gaps created by Smart and Connected technologies in South Africa\",\"authors\":\"M. Botes, B. Townsend\",\"doi\":\"10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i2.201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\n\\n\\nThe prevalence of technology-embedded products, services, and cities, described colloquially as ‘smart’ technologies and ‘smart’ cities, has seen a spate of unprecedented growth in recent years. South Africa (SA) has not been left behind, with smartphones, smart watches, and smart voice-controlled virtual personal assistants such as Amazon’s Alexa now frequently used. But while these technologies hold great promise to revolutionise homes, offices and cities, their adoption poses challenges to individual and collective interests and wellbeing. After demonstrating the legal and ethical difficulties brought about by the introduction of these technologies, this article explores whether SA legislation is sufficiently robust to address these challenges. While the current legislative landscape addresses certain crucial difficulties – such as the safeguarding of personal data by the Protection of Personal Information Act No. 4 of 2013 (‘POPIA’) – it is suggested that the position regulating other aspects of smart technology adoption is, in large part, fragmented and ill-equipped to deal with some of the more pressing legal and ethical questions. Our contention is that, not dissimilar to the issues arising from artificial intelligence-based technological adoption, the extant legislative and regulatory frameworks do not go far enough in addressing the many concerns emerging from recent novel technological design, development, and deployment. Not only do smart technologies give rise to unique challenges, so does their deployment within the Global South and in South Africa, in particular. We suggest that appropriate and effective regulatory reform measures be undertaken in SA to provide better ethical guidance and policy prescriptions buttressed by rigorous regulatory oversight.\\n\\n\\n\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":43498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i2.201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/sajbl.2023.v16i2.201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

技术嵌入式产品、服务和城市的流行,通俗地说是“智能”技术和“智能”城市,近年来出现了前所未有的增长。南非也没有落后,智能手机、智能手表和智能语音控制的虚拟个人助理(如亚马逊的Alexa)现在经常使用。尽管这些技术有望彻底改变家庭、办公室和城市,但它们的采用对个人和集体的利益和福祉构成了挑战。在证明了引入这些技术带来的法律和伦理困难后,本文探讨了SA立法是否足以应对这些挑战。虽然目前的立法格局解决了某些关键困难,例如2013年第4号《个人信息保护法》(“OPIA”)对个人数据的保护,但有人认为,监管智能技术采用其他方面的立场在很大程度上是,支离破碎,无力处理一些更紧迫的法律和道德问题。我们的论点是,与基于人工智能的技术采用所产生的问题没有什么不同,现有的立法和监管框架在解决最近新技术设计、开发和部署中出现的许多问题方面做得不够。智能技术不仅带来了独特的挑战,而且在全球南方,特别是在南非的部署也带来了挑战。我们建议南非采取适当有效的监管改革措施,在严格的监管监督的支持下,提供更好的道德指导和政策处方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bridging the regulatory gaps created by Smart and Connected technologies in South Africa
The prevalence of technology-embedded products, services, and cities, described colloquially as ‘smart’ technologies and ‘smart’ cities, has seen a spate of unprecedented growth in recent years. South Africa (SA) has not been left behind, with smartphones, smart watches, and smart voice-controlled virtual personal assistants such as Amazon’s Alexa now frequently used. But while these technologies hold great promise to revolutionise homes, offices and cities, their adoption poses challenges to individual and collective interests and wellbeing. After demonstrating the legal and ethical difficulties brought about by the introduction of these technologies, this article explores whether SA legislation is sufficiently robust to address these challenges. While the current legislative landscape addresses certain crucial difficulties – such as the safeguarding of personal data by the Protection of Personal Information Act No. 4 of 2013 (‘POPIA’) – it is suggested that the position regulating other aspects of smart technology adoption is, in large part, fragmented and ill-equipped to deal with some of the more pressing legal and ethical questions. Our contention is that, not dissimilar to the issues arising from artificial intelligence-based technological adoption, the extant legislative and regulatory frameworks do not go far enough in addressing the many concerns emerging from recent novel technological design, development, and deployment. Not only do smart technologies give rise to unique challenges, so does their deployment within the Global South and in South Africa, in particular. We suggest that appropriate and effective regulatory reform measures be undertaken in SA to provide better ethical guidance and policy prescriptions buttressed by rigorous regulatory oversight.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Stellenbosch University Senate ought to remain neutral on the Israel-Palestine war in Gaza - A response to Mahomed and Hendricks A response to 'The Stellenbosch University Senate ought to remain neutral on the Israel-Palestine war in Gaza - A response to Mahomed and Hendricks' International humanitarian law: Dunant would be devastated again Organ donation after circulatory death – legal in South Africa and in alignment with Chapter 8 of the National Health Act and Regulations relating to organ and tissue donation The noble cause of medicine – fact or fallacy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1