scholarly journals Introduction to AI, Ethics & Society

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared Bielby ◽  
Rachel Fischer ◽  
Geoffrey Rockwell
Keyword(s):  
Ai Ethics

The Super-Aged Multiculturalism in South Korea and the Necessity of Wearable AI Ethics

J-Institute ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 34-41
Author(s):  
Eunsook Seo ◽  
Gyunyeol Park
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Ai Ethics

AI Ethics and Privacy Right

J-Institute ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Yi Li ◽  
Gyunyeol Park
Keyword(s):  
Ai Ethics

The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Knowledge ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Control Complex

This book explores the intertwining domains of artificial intelligence (AI) and ethics—two highly divergent fields which at first seem to have nothing to do with one another. AI is a collection of computational methods for studying human knowledge, learning, and behavior, including by building agents able to know, learn, and behave. Ethics is a body of human knowledge—far from completely understood—that helps agents (humans today, but perhaps eventually robots and other AIs) decide how they and others should behave. Despite these differences, however, the rapid development in AI technology today has led to a growing number of ethical issues in a multitude of fields, ranging from disciplines as far-reaching as international human rights law to issues as intimate as personal identity and sexuality. In fact, the number and variety of topics in this volume illustrate the width, diversity of content, and at times exasperating vagueness of the boundaries of “AI Ethics” as a domain of inquiry. Within this discourse, the book points to the capacity of sociotechnical systems that utilize data-driven algorithms to classify, to make decisions, and to control complex systems. Given the wide-reaching and often intimate impact these AI systems have on daily human lives, this volume attempts to address the increasingly complicated relations between humanity and artificial intelligence. It considers not only how humanity must conduct themselves toward AI but also how AI must behave toward humanity.

scholarly journals A Framework for Evaluating and Disclosing the ESG Related Impacts of AI with the SDGs

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8503
Author(s):  
Henrik Skaug Sætra
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Sustainability Reporting ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Ripple Effects ◽  
The Core ◽  
Social Governance ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Corporate Social

Artificial intelligence (AI) now permeates all aspects of modern society, and we are simultaneously seeing an increased focus on issues of sustainability in all human activities. All major corporations are now expected to account for their environmental and social footprint and to disclose and report on their activities. This is carried out through a diverse set of standards, frameworks, and metrics related to what is referred to as ESG (environment, social, governance), which is now, increasingly often, replacing the older term CSR (corporate social responsibility). The challenge addressed in this article is that none of these frameworks sufficiently capture the nature of the sustainability related impacts of AI. This creates a situation in which companies are not incentivised to properly analyse such impacts. Simultaneously, it allows the companies that are aware of negative impacts to not disclose them. This article proposes a framework for evaluating and disclosing ESG related AI impacts based on the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The core of the framework is here presented, with examples of how it forces an examination of micro, meso, and macro level impacts, a consideration of both negative and positive impacts, and accounting for ripple effects and interlinkages between the different impacts. Such a framework helps make analyses of AI related ESG impacts more structured and systematic, more transparent, and it allows companies to draw on research in AI ethics in such evaluations. In the closing section, Microsoft’s sustainability reporting from 2018 and 2019 is used as an example of how sustainability reporting is currently carried out, and how it might be improved by using the approach here advocated.

scholarly journals Philosophical foundations for digital ethics and AI Ethics: a dignitarian approach

AI and Ethics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Hanna ◽  
Emre Kazim
Keyword(s):  
Human Dignity ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Philosophical Foundations ◽  
Human Needs ◽  
Form Of Life ◽  
Digital Ethics ◽  
Human Happiness ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
The Impact

AbstractAI Ethics is a burgeoning and relatively new field that has emerged in response to growing concerns about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on human individuals and their social institutions. In turn, AI ethics is a part of the broader field of digital ethics, which addresses similar concerns generated by the development and deployment of new digital technologies. Here, we tackle the important worry that digital ethics in general, and AI ethics in particular, lack adequate philosophical foundations. In direct response to that worry, we formulate and rationally justify some basic concepts and principles for digital ethics/AI ethics, all drawn from a broadly Kantian theory of human dignity. Our argument, which is designed to be relatively compact and easily accessible, is presented in ten distinct steps: (1) what “digital ethics” and “AI ethics” mean, (2) refuting the dignity-skeptic, (3) the metaphysics of human dignity, (4) human happiness or flourishing, true human needs, and human dignity, (5) our moral obligations with respect to all human real persons, (6) what a natural automaton or natural machine is, (7) why human real persons are not natural automata/natural machines: because consciousness is a form of life, (8) our moral obligations with respect to the design and use of artificial automata or artificial machines, aka computers, and digital technology more generally, (9) what privacy is, why invasions of digital privacy are morally impermissible, whereas consensual entrances into digital privacy are either morally permissible or even obligatory, and finally (10) dignitarian morality versus legality, and digital ethics/AI ethics. We conclude by asserting our strongly-held belief that a well-founded and generally-accepted dignitarian digital ethics/AI ethics is of global existential importance for humanity.

scholarly journals Ethics as a Service: A Pragmatic Operationalisation of AI Ethics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Morley ◽  
Anat Elhalal ◽  
Francesca Garcia ◽  
Libby Kinsey ◽  
Jakob Mökander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ethics Codes ◽  
Practical Design ◽  
Ethical Design ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Algorithmic Design ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Technical Guidance ◽  
Tools And Methods

AbstractAs the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the associated ethical issues. This increased awareness has led to the realisation that existing legislation and regulation provides insufficient protection to individuals, groups, society, and the environment from AI harms. In response to this realisation, there has been a proliferation of principle-based ethics codes, guidelines and frameworks. However, it has become increasingly clear that a significant gap exists between the theory of AI ethics principles and the practical design of AI systems. In previous work, we analysed whether it is possible to close this gap between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of AI ethics through the use of tools and methods designed to help AI developers, engineers, and designers translate principles into practice. We concluded that this method of closure is currently ineffective as almost all existing translational tools and methods are either too flexible (and thus vulnerable to ethics washing) or too strict (unresponsive to context). This raised the question: if, even with technical guidance, AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic design, is the entire pro-ethical design endeavour rendered futile? And, if no, then how can AI ethics be made useful for AI practitioners? This is the question we seek to address here by exploring why principles and technical translational tools are still needed even if they are limited, and how these limitations can be potentially overcome by providing theoretical grounding of a concept that has been termed ‘Ethics as a Service.’

scholarly journals Ethics of Corporeal, Co-present Robots as Agents of Influence: a Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
AJung Moon ◽  
Shalaleh Rismani ◽  
H. F. Machiel Van der Loos
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Physical Environment ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Human Robot Interaction ◽  
Physical Interaction ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Natural Tendency ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Purpose of Review To summarize the set of roboethics issues that uniquely arise due to the corporeality and physical interaction modalities afforded by robots, irrespective of the degree of artificial intelligence present in the system. Recent Findings One of the recent trends in the discussion of ethics of emerging technologies has been the treatment of roboethics issues as those of “embodied AI,” a subset of AI ethics. In contrast to AI, however, robots leverage human’s natural tendency to be influenced by our physical environment. Recent work in human-robot interaction highlights the impact a robot’s presence, capacity to touch, and move in our physical environment has on people, and helping to articulate the ethical issues particular to the design of interactive robotic systems. Summary The corporeality of interactive robots poses unique sets of ethical challenges. These issues should be considered in the design irrespective of and in addition to the ethics of artificial intelligence implemented in them.

Bridging the gap from AI ethics research to practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy Baxter ◽  
Yoav Schlesinger ◽  
Sarah Aerni ◽  
Lewis Baker ◽  
Julie Dawson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research To Practice ◽  
Ethics Research ◽  
Ai Ethics
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document