Linking the semantic web to ODR: the Ontomedia project

Despite the conceptual vagueness of definitions, both Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 are opening up for ever-growing communities of users new forms of online interaction and customization of information. In this article we explore some of the critical features of Web 2.0 and 3.0 developments applied to different conflict domains, and then present some of the basic components of the Ontomedia platform. The Ontomedia project aims to provide mediation experts and users with a semantically enriched mediation platform where they are able to interact, mediate, and retrieve useful information on related cases in an effective and friendly way

ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP KEDUDUKAN KECERDASAN BUATAN ATAU ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEBAGAI SUBJEK HUKUM PADA HUKUM POSITIF INDONESIA

Indonesia need policies and regulations which can adapt with current technological development especially Artificial Intelligence.  The more sophisticated, Artificial Intelligence capability and continuously development over time, Artificial Intelligence cannot be acknowlegde as a legal object but Artificial Intelligence can be acknowledge as a legal subject, so the big challenge for government is prepare policies and regulations for Artificial Intelligence which will become a part of social life on Indonesia Positivisme Law for achieve people’s welfare and prosperity in the development of the state from suggestion, consideration and knowledge which can be conveyed to law enforcers especially on Artificial Intelligence. This research uses normative law juridical research methods. The legal position of Artificial Intelligence can be applied to the special laws of Artificial Intelligence as a legal subject, which is same as corporation. In order to have clearer legal certainty regarding the responsibility for legal acts commited by Artificial Intelligence, the identity of Artificial Intelligence can be made of an authentic deed

Between vision and practice:lack of alignment between AI strategies and energy regulations in the Dutch electricity sector

Different governmental institutions are publishing more and more visions, strategies, or proposed regulations related to artificial intelligence. This paper analyses how these visions or proposed regulations are put into practice. To this end, the proposed European Union Artificial Intelligence Act, the Dutch artificial intelligence strategy and the proposed new Dutch energy law are compared. Even though the new Dutch energy law was created parallel and published after the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act, it does not take into account the use of artificial intelligence in the electricity actor. Similarly, the focus points of the Dutch artificial intelligence strategy are ignored in the new Dutch energy law. Two issues emerge from this. First, it is questionable if and how visions, strategies and proposed regulations related to AI are translated into different sectors and related practices. Second, as the different acts and proposed regulations do not communicate or overlap, gaps develop between the different policies. It is unclear which institutions will fill in these gaps

Double elevation: Autonomous weapons and the search for an irreducible law of war

What should be the role of law in response to the spread of artificial intelligence in war? Fuelled by both public and private investment, military technology is accelerating towards increasingly autonomous weapons, as well as the merging of humans and machines. Contrary to much of the contemporary debate, this is not a paradigm change; it is the intensification of a central feature in the relationship between technology and war: Double elevation, above one's enemy and above oneself. Elevation above one's enemy aspires to spatial, moral, and civilizational distance. Elevation above oneself reflects a belief in rational improvement that sees humanity as the cause of inhumanity and de-humanization as our best chance for humanization. The distance of double elevation is served by the mechanization of judgement. To the extent that judgement is seen as reducible to algorithm, law becomes the handmaiden of mechanization. In response, neither a focus on questions of compatibility nor a call for a 'ban on killer robots' help in articulating a meaningful role for law. Instead, I argue that we should turn to a long-standing philosophical critique of artificial intelligence, which highlights not the threat of omniscience, but that of impoverished intelligence. Therefore, if there is to be a meaningful role for law in resisting double elevation, it should be law encompassing subjectivity, emotion and imagination, law irreducible to algorithm, a law of war that appreciates situated judgement in the wielding of violence for the collective

PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PERDATA TERHADAP ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE YANG MENIMBULKAN KERUGIAN MENURUT HUKUM DI INDONESIA

Artificial Intelligence ranging from the simple ones to the advanced forms is developed by various countries, including Indonesia. It is then inavoidable that all these types of Artificial Intelligence might produce errors and causing loss to the user. Unfortunately, at present there is no law in Indonesia explicitly regulates the legal protection for users who encounter material and immaterial losses due to output errors made by Artificial Intelligence. This research is done to contribute in the field of private law with a normative and descriptive approaches. It is found that dynamic and open regulation is needed to anticipate and deal with any future risks. As a conclusion, as there is no legislation that specifically regulates the responsibility of material and immaterial losses caused by Artificial Intelligence, hence at present we can only rely on Article 1367 of the Burgerlijk Wetboek known as strict liability. Artificial Intelligence can be considered as an intangible property, therefore the person who oversees the use of Artificial Intelligence has a responsibility for the losses caused in the course of the use of Artificial Intelligence

PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PERDATA TERHADAP ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE YANG MENIMBULKAN KERUGIAN MENURUT HUKUM DI INDONESIA

Artificial Intelligence ranging from the simple ones to the advanced forms is developed by various countries, including Indonesia. It is then inavoidable that all these types of Artificial Intelligence might produce errors and causing loss to the user. Unfortunately, at present there is no law in Indonesia explicitly regulates the legal protection for users who encounter material and immaterial losses due to output errors made by Artificial Intelligence. This research is done to contribute in the field of private law with a normative and descriptive approaches. It is found that dynamic and open regulation is needed to anticipate and deal with any future risks. As a conclusion, as there is no legislation that specifically regulates the responsibility of material and immaterial losses caused by Artificial Intelligence, hence at present we can only rely on Article 1367 of the Burgerlijk Wetboek known as strict liability. Artificial Intelligence can be considered as an intangible property, therefore the person who oversees the use of Artificial Intelligence has a responsibility for the losses caused in the course of the use of Artificial Intelligence

AI Governance in the Financial Industry

Legal regimes in the United States generally conceptualize obligations as attaching along one of two pathways: through the entity or the individual. Although these dual conceptualizations made sense in an ordinary pre-modem world, they no longer capture the financial system land­ scape, now that artificial intelligence has entered the scene. Neither person nor entity, artificial intelligence is an activity or a capacity, something that mediates relations between individuals and entities. And whether we like it or not, artificial intelligence has already reshaped financial markets. From Robinhood, to the Flash Crash, to Twitter\u27s Hash Crash, to the Knight Capital incident, each of these episodes foreshadows the potential for puzzling conundrums and serious disruptions. Little space exists in current legal and regulatory regimes to properly manage the actions of artificial intelligence in the financial space. Artificial intelligence does not have intent and therefore cannot form the scienter required in many securities law contexts. It also defies the approach commonly used in financial regulation of focusing on size or sophistication. Moreover, the activity of artificial intelligence is too diffuse, distributed, and ephemeral to effectively gov­ ern by aiming regulatory firepower at the artificial intelligence itself or even at the entities and individuals currently targeted in securities law. Even when the law deviates from the classic focus on entities and individuals, as it meanders through areas that implicate artificial intelli­ gence, we lack a unifying theory for what we are doing and why. To begin filling this void, we propose conceptualizing artificial intelligence as a type of skill or capacity-a superpower, if you will. Just as the power of flight opens new avenues for superhe­ roes, so, too, does the power of artificial intelligence open new avenues for mere mortals. With the capacity of flight as its animating imagery, the article proposes what we would call touch­ point regulation. Specifically, we set out three forms of scaffolding-touchpoints, types of evil, and types of players-that provide the essential structure for any body of law society will need for governing artificial intelligence in the financial industry

Artificial Intelligence: Application Today and Implications Tomorrow

This paper analyzes the applications of artificial intelligence to the legal industry, specifically in the fields of legal research and contract drafting. First, it will look at the implications of artificial intelligence (A.I.) for the current practice of law. Second, it will delve into the future implications of A.I. on law firms and the possible regulatory challenges that come with A.I. The proliferation of A.I. in the legal sphere will give laymen (clients) access to the information and services traditionally provided exclusively by attorneys. With an increase in access to these services will come a change in the role that lawyers must play. A.I. is a tool that will increase access to cheaper and more efficient services, but non-lawyers lack the training to analyze and understand information it puts out. The role of lawyers will change to fill this role, namely utilizing these tools to create a better work product with greater efficiency for their clients