Skip to main content

Home/ Duty of care + Standards _ CU/ Group items tagged discrimination

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Carsten Ullrich

The Next Wave of Platform Governance - Centre for International Governance Innovation - 0 views

www.cigionline.org/...next-wave-platform-governance

regulation online platform governance risk-based

shared by Carsten Ullrich on 21 May 21 - No Cached
  • he shift from product- and service-based to platform-based business creates a new set of platform governance implications — especially when these businesses rely upon shared infrastructure from a small, powerful group of technology providers (Figure 1).
  • The industries in which AI is deployed, and the primary use cases it serves, will naturally determine the types and degrees of risk, from health and physical safety to discrimination and human-rights violations. Just as disinformation and hate speech are known risks of social media platforms, fatal accidents are a known risk of automobiles and heavy machinery, whether they are operated by people or by machines. Bias and discrimination are potential risks of any automated system, but they are amplified and pronounced in technologies that learn, whether autonomously or by training, from existing data.
  • Business Model-Specific Implications
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • The implications of cloud platforms such as Salesforce, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon and others differ again. A business built on a technology platform with a track record of well-developed data and model governance, audit capability, responsible product development practices and a culture and track record of transparency will likely reduce some risks related to biased data and model transparency, while encouraging (and even enforcing) adoption of those same practices and norms throughout its ecosystem.
  • policies that govern their internal practices for responsible technology development; guidance, tools and educational resources for their customers’ responsible use of their technologies; and policies (enforced in terms of service) that govern the acceptable use of not only their platforms but also specific technologies, such as face recognition or gait detection.
  • At the same time, overreliance on a small, well-funded, global group of technology vendors to set the agenda for responsible and ethical use of AI may create a novel set of risks.
  • Audit is another area that, while promising, is also fraught with potential conflict. Companies such as O’Neil Risk Consulting and Algorithmic Auditing, founded by the author of Weapons of Math Destruction, Cathy O’Neil, provide algorithmic audit and other services intended to help companies better understand and remediate data and model issues related to discriminatory outcomes. Unlike, for example, audits of financial statements, algorithmic audit services are as yet entirely voluntary, lack oversight by any type of governing board, and do not carry disclosure requirements or penalties. As a result, no matter how thorough the analysis or comprehensive the results, these types of services are vulnerable to manipulation or exploitation by their customers for “ethics-washing” purposes.
  • , we must broaden our understanding of platforms beyond social media sites to other types of business platforms, examine those risks in context, and approach governance in a way that accounts not only for the technologies themselves, but also for the disparate impacts among industries and business models.
  • This is a time-sensitive issue
  • arge technology companies — for a range of reasons — are trying to fill the policy void, creating the potential for a kind of demilitarized zone for AI, one in which neither established laws nor corporate policy hold sway.
Carsten Ullrich

Article - 0 views

merlin-int.obs.coe.int/...8817

regulation social media duty of care belgium intermediary

shared by Carsten Ullrich on 17 Mar 20 - Cached
  • On 6 February 2020, the audiovisual regulator of the French-speaking community of Belgium (Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel – CSA) published a guidance note on the fight against certain forms of illegal Internet content, in particular hate speech
  • In the note, the CSA begins by summarising the current situation, highlighting the important role played by content-sharing platforms and their limited responsibility. It emphasises that some content can be harmful to young people in particular, whether they are the authors or victims of the content. It recognises that regulation, in its current form, is inappropriate and creates an imbalance between the regulation of online content-sharing platform operators, including social networks, and traditional players in the audiovisual sector
  • ould take its own legislative measures without waiting for work to start on an EU directive on the subject. 
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • f it advocates crimes against humanity; incites or advocates terrorist acts; or incites hatred, violence, discrimination or insults against a person or a group of people on grounds of origin, alleged race, religion, ethnic background, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability, whether real or alleged.
  • obligations be imposed on the largest content-sharing platform operators, that is, any natural or legal person offering, on a professional basis, whether for remuneration or not, an online content-sharing platform, wherever it is based, used by at least 20% of the population of the French-speaking region of Belgium or the bilingual Brussels-Capital region.
  • iged to remove or block content notified to them that is ‘clearly illegal’ within 24 hours. T
  • need to put in place reporting procedures as well as processes for contesting their decisions
  • appoint an official contact person
  • half-yearly report on compliance with their obligation
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20▼ items per page