-
Slota, S.C.; Fleischmann, K.R.; Greenberg, S.; Verma, N.; Cummings, B.; Li, L.; Shenefiel, C.: Locating the work of artificial intelligence ethics (2023)
0.04
0.041222658 = product of:
0.082445316 = sum of:
0.082445316 = product of:
0.16489063 = sum of:
0.16489063 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16489063 = score(doc=899,freq=6.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.6098877 = fieldWeight in 899, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=899)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The scale and complexity of the data and algorithms used in artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems present significant challenges for anticipating their ethical, legal, and policy implications. Given these challenges, who does the work of AI ethics, and how do they do it? This study reports findings from interviews with 26 stakeholders in AI research, law, and policy. The primary themes are that the work of AI ethics is structured by personal values and professional commitments, and that it involves situated meaning-making through data and algorithms. Given the stakes involved, it is not enough to simply satisfy that AI will not behave unethically; rather, the work of AI ethics needs to be incentivized.
- Series
- Special issue: artificial intelligence and work
-
Neumaier, O.: Was hat 'Künstliche Intelligenz' mit Ethik zu tun? (1994)
0.03
0.031733215 = product of:
0.06346643 = sum of:
0.06346643 = product of:
0.12693286 = sum of:
0.12693286 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 2456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12693286 = score(doc=2456,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.46949172 = fieldWeight in 2456, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2456)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The relevance of ethical considerations for AI is discussed in 2 respects: on the one hand with regard to the consequences one has to cope with when dealing with computer systems that are considered 'intelligent' and, on the other hand had with questions of responsibility which arises when such systems are used. In what sense has Artificial Intelligence to deal with ethics?
-
Rubel, A.; Castro, C.; Pham, A.: Algorithms and autonomy : the ethics of automated decision systems (2021)
0.03
0.028048465 = product of:
0.05609693 = sum of:
0.05609693 = product of:
0.11219386 = sum of:
0.11219386 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11219386 = score(doc=671,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.414976 = fieldWeight in 671, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=671)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- LCSH
- Artificial intelligence / Law and legislation / Moral and ethical aspects
- Subject
- Artificial intelligence / Law and legislation / Moral and ethical aspects
-
Brito, M. de: Social affects engineering and ethics (2023)
0.02
0.023799911 = product of:
0.047599822 = sum of:
0.047599822 = product of:
0.095199645 = sum of:
0.095199645 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 1135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.095199645 = score(doc=1135,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.3521188 = fieldWeight in 1135, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1135)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This text proposes a multidisciplinary reflection on the subject of ethics, based on philosophical approaches, using Spinoza's work, Ethics, as a foundation. The power of Spinoza's geometric reasoning and deterministic logic, compatible with formal grammars and programming languages, provides a favorable framework for this purpose. In an information society characterized by an abundance of data and a diversity of perspectives, complex thinking is an essential tool for developing an ethical construct that can deal with the uncertainty and contradictions in the field. Acknowledging the natural complexity of ethics in interpersonal relationships, the use of AI techniques appears unavoidable. Artificial intelligence in KOS offers the potential for processing complex questions through the formal modeling of concepts in ethical discourse. By formalizing problems, we hope to unleash the potential of ethical analysis; by addressing complexity analysis, we propose a mechanism for understanding problems and empowering solutions.
-
Frohmann, B.: Subjectivity and information ethics (2008)
0.02
0.022438772 = product of:
0.044877544 = sum of:
0.044877544 = product of:
0.08975509 = sum of:
0.08975509 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 1360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08975509 = score(doc=1360,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.3319808 = fieldWeight in 1360, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1360)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In A Brief History of Information Ethics, Thomas Froehlich (2004) quickly surveyed under several broad categories some of the many issues that constitute information ethics: under the category of librarianship - censorship, privacy, access, balance in collections, copyright, fair use, and codes of ethics; under information science, which Froehlich sees as closely related to librarianship - confidentiality, bias, and quality of information; under computer ethics - intellectual property, privacy, fair representation, nonmaleficence, computer crime, software reliability, artificial intelligence, and e-commerce; under cyberethics (issues related to the Internet, or cyberspace) - expert systems, artificial intelligence (again), and robotics; under media ethics - news, impartiality, journalistic ethics, deceit, lies, sexuality, censorship (again), and violence in the press; and under intercultural information ethics - digital divide, and the ethical role of the Internet for social, political, cultural, and economic development. Many of the debates in information ethics, on these and other issues, have to do with specific kinds of relationships between subjects. The most important subject and a familiar figure in information ethics is the ethical subject engaged in moral deliberation, whether appearing as the bearer of moral rights and obligations to other subjects, or as an agent whose actions are judged, whether by others or by oneself, according to the standards of various moral codes and ethical principles. Many debates in information ethics revolve around conflicts between those acting according to principles of unfettered access to information and those finding some information offensive or harmful. Subjectivity is at the heart of information ethics. But how is subjectivity understood? Can it be understood in ways that broaden ethical reflection to include problems that remain invisible when subjectivity is taken for granted and when how it is created remains unquestioned? This article proposes some answers by investigating the meaning and role of subjectivity in information ethics.[In an article on cyberethics (2000), I asserted that there was no information ethics in any special sense beyond the application of general ethical principles to information services. Here, I take a more expansive view.]
-
Garcia Gutíerrez, A.L.: Knowledge organization from a "culture of the border" : towards a transcultural ethics of mediation (2003)
0.02
0.01983326 = product of:
0.03966652 = sum of:
0.03966652 = product of:
0.07933304 = sum of:
0.07933304 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 2771) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07933304 = score(doc=2771,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.29343233 = fieldWeight in 2771, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2771)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The social construction of the digital memory, let us call it "exomemory", has traditionally been a task related to aseptical procedures and tools but, in fact, it is an activity crossed by complexity and mediation. The positivist model claims for objectivity as the frame and goal in and for which electronic and extemal memory workers and thinkers have to fight and strive. The theoretical concept of multiculturalism is a dangerous slogan and not sufficiently critical as to tackle the rights of diversity and singularity even within a given (but not real) "monocultural society". Exomemory mediators as librarians, archivists, documentalists or virtual curators are not capable of addressing their tasks from a holistic approach compatible with every culture without determining their products and services of symbolic value from an hegemonic position, should it be at local, national or global level. So, these professionals and scholars have to practice reflexivity and include other metatheoretical concepts in their ordinary actions so that users may know who is behind the analysis, "whose are the tracks". To achieve this aim, the field of research called "Knowledge organization" must be opened to a new paradigm in which Critical Theory and Hermeneutics go together. Several theoretical and metaphorical terms commonly used are reviewed and forced to their paradoxical limits. The essay stands for a "culture of the border" as the best imaginary place to depict and accept those contradictions denied by dogmatic and hermetic intelligence.
-
Broughton, V.: ¬The respective roles of intellectual creativity and automation in representing diversity : human and machine generated bias (2019)
0.02
0.01983326 = product of:
0.03966652 = sum of:
0.03966652 = product of:
0.07933304 = sum of:
0.07933304 = weight(_text_:intelligence in 5728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07933304 = score(doc=5728,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2703623 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.29343233 = fieldWeight in 5728, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5728)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The paper traces the development of the discussion around ethical issues in artificial intelligence, and considers the way in which humans have affected the knowledge bases used in machine learning. The phenomenon of bias or discrimination in machine ethics is seen as inherited from humans, either through the use of biased data or through the semantics inherent in intellectually- built tools sourced by intelligent agents. The kind of biases observed in AI are compared with those identified in the field of knowledge organization, using religious adherents as an example of a community potentially marginalized by bias. A practical demonstration is given of apparent religious prejudice inherited from source material in a large database deployed widely in computational linguistics and automatic indexing. Methods to address the problem of bias are discussed, including the modelling of the moral process on neuroscientific understanding of brain function. The question is posed whether it is possible to model religious belief in a similar way, so that robots of the future may have both an ethical and a religious sense and themselves address the problem of prejudice.
-
Miller, S.: Privacy, data bases and computers (1998)
0.01
0.013792347 = product of:
0.027584694 = sum of:
0.027584694 = product of:
0.05516939 = sum of:
0.05516939 = weight(_text_:22 in 3027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05516939 = score(doc=3027,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3027, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3027)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 2.1999 15:57:43
-
Seadle, M.: Copyright in a networked world : ethics and infringement (2004)
0.01
0.013792347 = product of:
0.027584694 = sum of:
0.027584694 = product of:
0.05516939 = sum of:
0.05516939 = weight(_text_:22 in 2833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05516939 = score(doc=2833,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2833, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2833)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.106-110
-
Hammwöhner, R.: Anmerkungen zur Grundlegung der Informationsethik (2006)
0.01
0.013792347 = product of:
0.027584694 = sum of:
0.027584694 = product of:
0.05516939 = sum of:
0.05516939 = weight(_text_:22 in 6063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05516939 = score(doc=6063,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6063, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6063)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13.10.2006 10:22:03
-
O'Neil, R.M.: Free speech in cyberspace (1998)
0.01
0.013792347 = product of:
0.027584694 = sum of:
0.027584694 = product of:
0.05516939 = sum of:
0.05516939 = weight(_text_:22 in 248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05516939 = score(doc=248,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 248, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=248)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 2.1999 15:50:50
-
Helbing, D.: ¬Das große Scheitern (2019)
0.01
0.013792347 = product of:
0.027584694 = sum of:
0.027584694 = product of:
0.05516939 = sum of:
0.05516939 = weight(_text_:22 in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05516939 = score(doc=5599,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 25.12.2019 14:19:22
-
Aghemo, A.: Etica professionale e servizio di informazione (1993)
0.01
0.012068303 = product of:
0.024136607 = sum of:
0.024136607 = product of:
0.048273213 = sum of:
0.048273213 = weight(_text_:22 in 2453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048273213 = score(doc=2453,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2453, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2453)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.1996 13:22:31
-
Lengauer, E.: Analytische Rechtsethik im Kontext säkularer Begründungsdiskurse zur Würde biologischer Entitäten (2008)
0.01
0.012068303 = product of:
0.024136607 = sum of:
0.024136607 = product of:
0.048273213 = sum of:
0.048273213 = weight(_text_:22 in 1697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048273213 = score(doc=1697,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1697, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1697)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 17. 3.2008 15:17:22
-
Reed, G.M.; Sanders, J.W.: ¬The principle of distribution (2008)
0.01
0.008620217 = product of:
0.017240435 = sum of:
0.017240435 = product of:
0.03448087 = sum of:
0.03448087 = weight(_text_:22 in 1868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03448087 = score(doc=1868,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1868, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1868)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 6.2008 12:22:41
-
Homan, P.A.: Library catalog notes for "bad books" : ethics vs. responsibilities (2012)
0.01
0.008620217 = product of:
0.017240435 = sum of:
0.017240435 = product of:
0.03448087 = sum of:
0.03448087 = weight(_text_:22 in 420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03448087 = score(doc=420,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 420, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=420)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 9.2012 14:22:00
-
Information ethics : privacy, property, and power (2005)
0.01
0.006095414 = product of:
0.012190828 = sum of:
0.012190828 = product of:
0.024381656 = sum of:
0.024381656 = weight(_text_:22 in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024381656 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Classification
- 323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)
- DDC
- 323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)
-
"Code of Ethics" verabschiedet (2007)
0.01
0.0060341517 = product of:
0.012068303 = sum of:
0.012068303 = product of:
0.024136607 = sum of:
0.024136607 = weight(_text_:22 in 459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024136607 = score(doc=459,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 459, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=459)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Im Rahmen des 3. Leipziger Kongresses für Information und Bibliothek 19.-22. März 2007 hat Bibliothek & Information Deutschland (BID) die im folgenden wiedergegebenen "Ethischen Grundsätze der Bibliotheks- und Informationsberufe" verabschiedet und der Presse und Fachöffentlichkeit vorgestellt. Damit folgt Deutschland den rund 40 Ländern weltweit, die bereits einen "Code of Ethics" veröffentlicht haben. Diese ethischen Richtlinien sind auf der IFLA/FAIFE-Website gesammelt unter www.ifla.org/faife/ethics/codes.htm.
-
"Code of Ethics" verabschiedet (2007)
0.01
0.00517213 = product of:
0.01034426 = sum of:
0.01034426 = product of:
0.02068852 = sum of:
0.02068852 = weight(_text_:22 in 462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02068852 = score(doc=462,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17824122 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.050899457 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 462, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=462)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Im Rahmen des 3. Leipziger Kongresses für Information und Bibliothek 19.-22. März 2007 hat Bibliothek & Information Deutschland (BID) die im folgenden wiedergegebenen "Ethischen Grundsätze der Bibliotheks- und Informationsberufe" verabschiedet und der Presse und Fachöffentlichkeit vorgestellt. Damit folgt Deutschland den rund 40 Ländern weltweit, die bereits einen "Code of Ethics" veröffentlicht haben. Diese ethischen Richtlinien sind auf der IFLA/FAIFE-Website gesammelt unter www.ifla.org/faife/ethics/codes.htm.
