Töötajate õiguste kaitse algoritmilise juhtimise korral

https://www.ester.ee/record=b5505160*es

Προσέγγιση της ψηφιακής επικοινωνίας από τη θεωρία της πολιτιστικής βιομηχανίας.

Στην παρούσα εργασία μελετάται η σύγχρονη ψηφιακή επικοινωνία χρησιμοποιώντας τη θεωρία της πολιτιστικής βιομηχανίας από την κριτική θεωρία. Αρχικά, αναπτύσσεται το θεωρητικό πλαίσιο όπως παρουσιάστηκε από τους Χορκχάιμερ και Αντόρνο τη δεκαετία του ’40 για την πολιτιστική βιομηχανία το οποίο χρησιμοποιείται ως κοινωνική θεωρία. Στη συνέχεια, γίνεται μία μετάβαση στη κοινωνιολογική προσέγγιση του ελεύθερου χρόνου, τόσο από την κριτική θεωρία όσο και στην έννοια του κυρίαρχου χρόνου. Το κεντρικό ερευνητικό ερώτημα της εργασίας αφορά τον κυρίαρχο χρόνο στο σήμερα και στην εποχή της νέας ψηφιακής συνθήκης. Είναι ο νέος κυρίαρχος χρόνος ο ψηφιακός; Για την απάντηση αυτού του ερωτήματος, διεξάγεται εμπειρική έρευνα με τη μεθοδολογία της προφορικής ιστορίας. Δέκα αφηγητές και αφηγήτριες, 5 εξοικειωμένοι/ες με τη χρήση των μέσων κοινωνικής δικτύωσης και 5 χωρίς άμεση επαφή, απαντούν με ποιον τρόπο αντιλαμβάνονται τον ελεύθερο τους χρόνο μέσα στον νέο ψηφιακό κόσμο που αναδεύεται.In this study, we analyze digital communication by using the theory of the cultural industry from critical theory. Initially, the theoretical framework developed as presented by Horkheimer and Adorno in the 1940s for the cultural industry that used as a social theory. Afterwards, there is a transition to leisure time, both from critical theory and to the sociological approach of dominant time concept. The central research question concerns the dominant time in the era of the new digital treaty. Is digital time the new dominant one? To answer this question, qualitative research is conducted with the methodology of oral history. Ten narrators, 5 familiar with the use of social media and 5 without direct contact, answer how they perceive their free time in the new digital era

BEING PROFILED:COGITAS ERGO SUM

Profiling the European citizen: why today's democracy needs to look harder at the negative potential of new technology than at its positive potential

(Dis)Obedience in Digital Societies: Perspectives on the Power of Algorithms and Data

Algorithms are not to be regarded as a technical structure but as a social phenomenon - they embed themselves, currently still very subtle, into our political and social system. Algorithms shape human behavior on various levels: they influence not only the aesthetic reception of the world but also the well-being and social interaction of their users. They act and intervene in a political and social context. As algorithms influence individual behavior in these social and political situations, their power should be the subject of critical discourse - or even lead to active disobedience and to the need for appropriate tools and methods which can be used to break the algorithmic power

(Dis)Obedience in Digital Societies

Algorithms are not to be regarded as a technical structure but as a social phenomenon - they embed themselves, currently still very subtle, into our political and social system. Algorithms shape human behavior on various levels: they influence not only the aesthetic reception of the world but also the well-being and social interaction of their users. They act and intervene in a political and social context. As algorithms influence individual behavior in these social and political situations, their power should be the subject of critical discourse - or even lead to active disobedience and to the need for appropriate tools and methods which can be used to break the algorithmic power

Individual control and data protection. Looking back and moving forward.

This work aims at investigating the concept of “individual control over personal data”, as a core constituent of data protection law. In an era in which personal data have become a main driving force behind innovation, growth and prosperity; companies and governments are at war to gain new usable knowledge; technological advances are upstaging expectations in terms of what can be inferred, predicted and manipulated through data, and people are milked at an increasing speed to fulfill the generalized data hunger, calls to bring individuals back in control of their personal data and develop a more individual-friendly data ecosystem have been increasingly pressing. Yet, older and newer hurdles still hinder a satisfactory implementation of this vision. Against this backdrop, this work intends to investigate in depth the notion of “individual control” in the data protection realm and its persisting shortcomings, and attempt to further explore what steps could be made to move forward, in order to offer the necessary support or supplementation to this underlying principle of data protection. To this end, the analysis starts by providing a historical overview to track the emergence of this notion in the European data protection context, taking into account the role assigned to the concept of “control” in the doctrinal debate, its legal manifestation within regulatory provisions (at national, international and EU level) and the approach of the CJEU jurisprudence on the matter. The analysis further considers the manifold issues that undermine the effective implementation of the idea of individual control, particularly as a result of the technological changes that have transformed our society and revolutionized the way in which we live and communicate. Finally, in light of the shortcomings affecting the privacy self-management logic, the work seeks to explore possible a selection of mechanisms and approaches that, if adequately leveraged and implemented, could offer effective support and complementation to the individual control model, with a view to increasing the level of protection offered to individuals. These mechanisms include both “individual-centric” measures, whose leading actors remain data subjects and whose objective is to enhance the means individuals can use to gain better control, but also measures that move beyond a strict “data subject-focused” dimension, in that they are addressed to different societal actors and approach data protection from a broader collective rather than strictly individualistic perspective. As the analysis shows, there is, unfortunately, no silver bullet. However, the promotion and valorization of the proposed mechanisms and the combined benefits that these could bring, in their own way, on the data protection table are a first essential step to start building a systemic and comprehensive response to the protection gaps that afflict individuals and society as a result of the weaknesses currently affecting the individual control logic

Technology and regulation 2021

Technology and Regulation (TechReg) is an international journal of law, technology and society, with an interdisciplinary identity. TechReg provides an online platform for disseminating original research on the legal and regulatory challenges posed by existing and emerging technologies (and their applications) including, but by no means limited to, the Internet and digital technology, artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics, neurotechnology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, energy and climate change technology, and health and food technology. This book contains Volume 3 (2021) of the journal

Technology and regulation 2021

Technology and Regulation (TechReg) is an international journal of law, technology and society, with an interdisciplinary identity. TechReg provides an online platform for disseminating original research on the legal and regulatory challenges posed by existing and emerging technologies (and their applications) including, but by no means limited to, the Internet and digital technology, artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics, neurotechnology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, energy and climate change technology, and health and food technology. This book contains Volume 3 (2021) of the journal

Syrjivyyden tunnistettavuus luonnollisia henkilöitä koskevan algoritmisen päätöksenteon yhteydessä

Tutkielmassa analysoin algoritmisen päätöksenteon mahdollisesti sisältävän piilevän syrjivyyden tunnistamisen haasteita päätöksenteon kohteena olevan henkilön näkökulmasta tarkasteltuna. Tutkielmassa arvioin sitä, millä tavoin algoritmisessa päätöksenteossa hyödynnettävissä koneoppimiseen perustuvissa tekoälyjärjestelmissä voi ilmetä syrjivyyttä. Tutkimuksen keskeinen kysymys on se, onko läpinäkyvyyden ja avoimuuden kautta ylipäänsä mahdollista luoda riittävä ymmärrys syrjivyydestä päätöksenteon kohteena olevalle henkilölle, jotta tämän olisi mahdollista reagoida asiaan. Tutkielmassa käytetään useita eri oikeustieteellisessä tutkimuksessa sovellettavia metodologioita, joista keskeisin on tietosuojaoikeuden ja hallinto-oikeuden osa-alueiden systematisointiin perustuva lainopillinen menetelmä. Tutkielma sisältää myös analyyttisen oikeustieteen menetelmän mukaista tutkimusta. Tutkielma sisältää elementtejä myös oikeus- ja yhteiskuntatieteellisestä tutkimuksesta, sillä tutkielmassa analysoidaan oikeutta sen yhteiskunnallisessa kontekstissa. Tutkielman olennainen havainto on se, että algoritmisen päätöksenteon syrjivyys voi saada alkunsa eri tavoin päätöksenteossa: kyseeseen saattaa tulla yhteiskunnassa vallitsevien epäkohtien tahaton hyödyntäminen tekoälyjärjestelmissä tai tarkoituksellinen toiminta, jossa päätöksenteossa hyödynnetään sellaisia valintoja, jotka johtavat syrjintään. Tästä seuraa, että syrjivyyden tunnistamista tulee lähestyä tapauskohtaisesti. Ongelmallisemmaksi muodostuu korrelaatiosuhteisiin perustuvan päätöksenteon luoma niin sanottu piilevä syrjintä, jota ei käytännössä ole mahdollista tunnistaa järjestelmän mustan laatikon sisältä. Tällöin hallinnon algoritmisen päätöksenteon syrjivyyden tunnistamista koskevan keskustelun osalta erityishuomion tulisi kiinnittyä tällaisten päätöksentekojärjestelmien riskien asianmukaiseen hallintaan

On security, once more. Assorted inquiries in aviation

My dissertation seeks to establish a nuanced understanding of security through an empirical account based on research in the field of aviation security. The core of the dissertation consists of 6 articles (published, accepted for publication, or under review) that deal with distinct technologies, knowledges, and practices within aviation security. In detail, the articles are as follows: Leese M (2013) Blurring the Dimensions of Privacy? Law Enforcement and Trusted Traveler Programs. Computer Law & Security Review 29(5): 480-490; Leese M (2014) The New Profiling: Algorithms, Black Boxes, and the Failure of Anti-discriminatory Safeguards in the European Union. Security Dialogue 45(5): 494-511; Leese M (2015) Privacy and Security - On the Evolution of a European Conflict. In Gutwirth S, Leenes R & De Hert P (eds.) Re-forming European Data Protection Law. Dordrecht/Heidelberg/New York/London: Springer, 271-292; Leese M (2015) Body Scanners in Germany: A Case of Failed Securitization. European Journal of Internal Security (forthcoming); Leese M and Koenigseder A (2015) Humor at the Airport? Visualization, Exposure, and Laughter in the “War on Terror”. International Political Sociology (forthcoming); Leese M (under review) Governing airport security: an empirical account between economic rationality and the public good. Criminology & Criminal Justice. These empirical pieces are embedded in a theoretical framework that offers multiple perspectives on security, including security as value, security as transformation, security as securitization, security as future, security as government, security as surveillance, security as technology, security as economy, security as assemblage, and security as normativity. The applied perspectives are arguably linked, leading in their subsequent order to a ‘complication’ of security that in the end culminates in the call for an understanding of security as a normatively charged field that – especially when considering its potentially detrimental impacts on human rights and civil liberties – should be pried away from the notion of threat and exceptionalism and instead be re-politicized