Responsible AI governance: A response to UN interim report on governing AI for humanity

A response to UN interim report on governing AI for humanit

How do populist supporters engage online?

Populism has recently gained momentum across the globe, with populist parties having a significant or greater presence in political systems than ever before. Although the connection between the Internet and populism was identified quite early, researchers have only recently started to be interested in populism and its relationship to the Internet. Nonetheless, substantial attention is paid to the supply-side of populism (politicians or political parties). While the Internet provided new means for populist actors to communicate with the electorate, people who support populist leaders, politicians or parties also take advantages of Internet tools. The Internet gives populist supporters the ability to connect with like-minded people and express themselves openly. To investigate the demand-side of populism from the perspective of populist online discussion, I first re-think a typology of political participation offered by Ekman & Amnå (2012). I make a distinction between social involvement (being attentive to politics), political participation (actions aimed at influencing the political outcomes) and civic engagement (working towards community) and argue that these three categories are not exclusive and provide different lenses through which to view political activity online. In order to explore populist supporters’ political engagement online, the perspective of social involvement is used. Social involvement in this thesis is analysed by looking at the online expression of populist supporters and their mode of democratic communication. I analyse the online activity of populist supporters of the Polish civic movement Kukiz’15 between 2017 and 2018. The proliferation of different online services and features, used for many purposes, makes it impractical to study one platform in-depth, therefore, one element of Facebook was selected – Facebook Pages. Facebook Pages are a popular feature and widely used by populist supporters in many countries. The social involvement of supporters of Kukiz’15 was examined at micro- and macro-level. The micro-level of analysis investigated the modes of communication used in comment sections based on Freelon’s (2010) conceptualisation of democratic norms of communication. The results presented differences between two analysed Facebook Pages in support of Kukiz’15. The Facebook Page entitled Kukiz’15 tended to attract more people who engaged in insulting comments, while Informator Kukiz’15 presented a more informal style of communication between its supporters. It was also discovered that the context in which comments are made is very important, as forms of communication are not restricted to only one model of democratic communication. The macro-level study looked at all Pages created in support of Kukiz’15, and it was discovered that Facebook Pages supporting the same party are not homogenous. Additionally, it was learnt that the two previously analysed Pages presented unique examples when compared to other Pages

A Response to Draft Online Safety Bill: A call for evidence from the Joint Committee

This report is the Trustworthy Autonomous Hub (TAS-hub) response to the call for evidence from the Joint Committee on the Draft Online Safety Bill. The Joint Committee was established to consider the Government's draft Bill to establish a new regulatory framework to tackle harmful content online

"Like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic"? Feasibility, Fairness, and Ethical Concerns of a Citizen Carbon Budget for Reducing CO2 Emissions

Radical and disruptive interventions are needed to reach "Net Zero" by 2050 to avert the climate catastrophe. Although governments, companies, cities, and institutions have pledged to take action and reduce their carbon emissions, the idea of personal carbon allowances or budgets for individuals has also been proposed as a potential national policy in the UK. In this paper, we employ a Research through Design approach to explore the notion of a carbon budget. We present combined results from two studies: firstly a workshop with members of environmental organisations (industry, charity, and policymaking) discussing the concept of a Citizen Carbon Budget (CCB) and app, from the wide perspective of societal desirability drawn from Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI); and secondly, a one-month deployment of a CCB mobile app with twelve members of the public based in the UK. Key findings from the combination of these approaches showed that the CCB app was fruitful in supporting awareness of personal carbon emissions and reflections about people’s lifestyles. However, several concerns were raised, including the unfairness of treating all people equally in environmental policy, regardless of their background and context. We provide considerations for policymaking and design, including intertwined perspectives drawn from the differing approaches of individual and collective action

Implementing Responsible Research Innovation Prompts and Practice Cards in a Project Investigating Instantaneous Trust

We reflect on our experience in the conceptualization and implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in an exploratory research project funded by the UKRI Trustworthy Autonomous Systems (TAS) Hub. In this paper, we report the narratives captured during a series of focused discussions with the project team and the industry partners using RRI Prompts and Practice Cards (PPC) as a tool to guide the discussion. Inspired by agile software development, we propose an agile-like RRI model for embedding RRI in exploratory research that supplements future growth, while ensuring a human-centred and ethical approach. Such an iterative model promotes continuous RRI focus, sensitivity and consideration for all stakeholders, minimising compromises and risks, whilst fostering team-wide well-being and research validity throughout the research life cycle

Connected Tech: Smart or Sinister?: A Call for Evidence from the Department of Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport

Impact of increasingly prevalent smart technologies We think that these changes will result in better or worse futures will be determined in large part by what is prioritised in technological innovation, and to what extent (if at all), previously marginalised, silenced, and exploited voices become part of the conversation. Our major concern is that innovation for profit is incentivised over societal benefits. We recommend that the government incentivises innovation for societal benefit. Impact of smart technologies on different groups Increased risks, especially for the most vulnerable and marginalised in society Smart technologies can improve the lives of vulnerable people but at the same time pose more significant risks if not appropriately managed. Therefore, we advocate for more inclusive development of smart devices at every stage of the product lifecycle (e.g. design, testing, implementation and maintenance). For example, datasets used for training, testing, and validating smart technologies are developed for common use cases; taking into account underprivileged and diverse parts of the society is key to their successful and fair adoption. While some technological solutions can be developed especially for vulnerable groups, a recent example with eye implants showed there is no protection once a company decides to end its production. We also advocate for more research with diverse groups. Smart technologies are mainly developed for commercial purposes, meaning that they do not consider different people’s needs and appetite for adoption. Digital literacies and skills The government needs to take responsibility for equipping society with the skills needed to use smart technologies in a safe and efficient way (eg to manage their privacy settings or set up secure passwords). Essential Digital Skills Report 2021 showed that c.10 million (19%) of UK adults do not have fundamental digital skills (for example, be able to use a device, connect to a Wi-Fi network and create and update passwords). Working with smart technologies will require more advanced skills that typical interactions with banking and other governmental online services. Autonomous systems that act on behalf of humans will need to new skills to interact with so that the operation of human-machine systems can be deemed dependable. How can we incentivise or encourage design that is safe, secure, environmentally- and user-friendly and human rights compliant? User-centred research and design People are not aware of certain functions that are designed and developed to protect their privacy or ensure security. We advocate to incentivise and promote companies to conduct user-centred research to make sure that their products are used in a safe and secure way, while their users are aware of different functions. Standardisation and more certifications of smart technologies to gain an understanding of their environmental impact The government, in order to achieve its climate goals, needs to give careful consideration and develop policies to ensure the sustainability of smart technologies during their whole product life cycle (production, manufacturing and disposal). Smart technologies also offer the opportunity to capture emissions data more accurately than previously possible. The key short- and long-term risks and threats Respecting an individual’s autonomy. It is imperative that individual users maintain the ability to remain in control and manage the use of smart systems, influence and direct decision-making, and understand the role that such technologies play in their lives. Privacy and data protection As the technology is largely data-driven, adherence to good data protection practices and the practice of good and lawful data stewardship is paramount. The use of cameras and monitors for tracking and surveillance purposes and used in many smart technology applications pose a risk of intrusion upon persons’ privacy rights. Behavioural manipulation. Smart technologies can threaten interests by using discriminatory, deceptive, and manipulative practices such as nudging and dark patterns. Use of voice, facial, and emotional recognition systems. Voice, facial, and emotion recognition systems, used in smart technologies, may pose challenges to users’ privacy, free expression, and social justice. Cyberattacks and data breaches. Greater use of smart technologies demand hacking and cyber security protections. Poorly secured smart products and services threaten persons’ online security, and subsequently, their privacy and safety. Developing common mental models Without common mental models, stakeholders cannot find a common ground to operationalise and understand the nature of smart technology. This can lead to levels of consumer confusion. Mixed initiative decision making and provenance tracking Without tracking the provenance of decisions in systems of humans and machines, we are likely to expose humans and organisations to ethical risks that they may not be responsible for nor equipped to deal with. Concerns with smart technologies and existing regulatory frameworks Regulatory and policy-development, guidance measures, and increased awareness and education can be used to overcome the concerns raised. These concerns can be managed and mitigated through an effective governance regime. Although there are existing frameworks and legislation applicable to smart technologies, they do not go far enough in addressing the unique risks posed by smart technologies. Gaps remain in the regulatory framework and policy is fragmented. We suggest that this requires urgent consideration

The future of connected and automated mobility in the UK: call for evidence

This report is a response to the call for evidence from the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and the Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles on the future of connected and automated mobility in the UK.Executive Summary:Despite relative weaknesses in global collaboration and co-creation platforms, smart road and communication infrastructure, urban planning, and public awareness, the United Kingdom (UK) has a substantial strength in the area of Connected and Automated Mobility (CAM) by investing in research and innovation platforms for developing the underlying technologies, creating impact, and co-creation leading to innovative solutions. Many UK legal and policymaking initiatives in this domain are world leading. To sustain the UK’s leading position, we make the following recommendations:• The development of financial and policy-related incentive schemes for research and innovation in the foundations and applications of autonomous systems as well as schemes for proof of concepts, and commercialisation.• Supporting policy and standardisation initiatives as well as engagement and community-building activities to increase public awareness and trust.• Giving greater attention to integrating CAM/Connected Autonomous Shared Electric vehicles (CASE) policy with related government priorities for mobility, including supporting active transport and public transport, and improving air quality.• Further investment in updating liability and risk models and coming up with innovative liability schemes covering the Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) ecosystem.• Investing in training and retraining of the work force in the automotive, mobility, and transport sectors, particularly with skills concerningArtificial Intelligence (AI), software and computer systems, in order to ensure employability and an adequate response to the drastically changing industrial landscap