Understanding international perceptions of the severity of harmful content online

Online social media platforms constantly struggle with harmful content such as misinformation and violence, but how to effectively moderate and prioritize such content for billions of global users with different backgrounds and values presents a challenge. Through an international survey with 1,696 internet users across 8 different countries across the world, this empirical study examines how international users perceive harmful content online and the similarities and differences in their perceptions. We found that across countries, the perceived severity consistently followed an exponential growth as the harmful content became more severe, but what harmful content were perceived as more or less severe varied significantly. Our results challenge platform content moderation&rsquo;s status quo of using a one-size-fits-all approach to govern international users, and provide guidance on how platforms may wish to prioritize and customize their moderation of harmful content. &nbsp;</p

The Care Work of Access

Current approaches to AI and Assistive Technology (AT) often foreground task completion over other encounters such as expressions of care. Our paper challenges and complements such task-completion approaches by attending to the care work of access—the continual affective and emotional adjustments that people make by noticing and attending to one another. We explore how this work impacts encounters among people with and without vision impairments who complete tasks together. We find that bound up in attempts to get things done are concerns for one another and how well people are doing together. Reading this work through emerging disability studies and feminist STS scholarship, we account for two important forms of work that give rise to access: (1) mundane attunements and (2) noninnocent authorizations. Together these processes work as sensitizing concepts to help HCI scholars account for the ways that intelligent ATs both produce access while sometimes subverting people with disabilities

Teratogenic Potential of Atrazine and 2,4-D Using Fetax

The teratogenic potential of commercial formulations of atrazine (40.8%) and 2,4-D was evaluated using FETAX (frog embryo teratogenic assay--Xenopus). Because these herbicides have been detected in ground and surface water, this study was designed to determine the adverse effects in buffer and natural water for both herbicides. All treatments showed a significant concentration-response effect on exposed embryos, except for the 2,4-D natural water sample. Atrazine (solubility of the commercial formula used 70 mg/L at 20 degrees C), compared to 2,4-D (solubility = 311 mg/L at pH = 1 and 25 degrees C), had a significantly greater teratogenic effect in both the buffer (atrazine EC50 = 33 mg/L, LC50 = 100 mg/L, TI = 3.03; 2,4-D EC50 = 245 mg/L, LC50 = 254 mg/L, TI = 1.04) and natural water samples (atrazine EC50 \u3c 8 mg/L, LC50 = 126 mg/L; 2,4-D EC50 and LC50 \u3e 270 mg/L). The 2,4-D EC50 and LC50 values for the buffer were similar at 245 mg/L and 254 mg/L. These similar values and the teratogenic index (TI) of 1.04 suggested that 2,4-D was more embryotoxic than teratogenic to frog embryos at high concentrations. Atrazine in natural water demonstrated a significantly greater EC50 (100% abnormality at 8 mg/L, the lowest test concentration) to frog embryos than the buffer experiment (EC50 = 33 mg/L). The extrapolated lowest observable adverse effect concentration (LOAEC) for the natural water experiment was 1.1 mg/L. These results suggest that atrazine toxicity is enhanced by the synergistic or additive effects of some component of the water or atrazine was already present in the sample. In contrast to atrazine, 2,4-D was less toxic in natural water than buffer. These results suggest that both atrazine and 2,4-D pose little threat, since their embryotoxicity and teratogenicity to frog embryos occur at high concentrations approaching their maximum solubility levels in water

Taxonomizing and Measuring Representational Harms: A Look at Image Tagging

In this paper, we examine computational approaches for measuring the "fairness" of image tagging systems, finding that they cluster into five distinct categories, each with its own analytic foundation. We also identify a range of normative concerns that are often collapsed under the terms "unfairness," "bias," or even "discrimination" when discussing problematic cases of image tagging. Specifically, we identify four types of representational harms that can be caused by image tagging systems, providing concrete examples of each. We then consider how different computational measurement approaches map to each of these types, demonstrating that there is not a one-to-one mapping. Our findings emphasize that no single measurement approach will be definitive and that it is not possible to infer from the use of a particular measurement approach which type of harm was intended to be measured. Lastly, equipped with this more granular understanding of the types of representational harms that can be caused by image tagging systems, we show that attempts to mitigate some of these types of harms may be in tension with one another

Queer in HCI : strengthening the community of LGBTQIA+ researchers and research

As Queer Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) becomes an established part of the larger field, both in terms of research on and with queer populations and in terms of employing queering theories and methods, the role of queer researchers has become a timely topic of discussion. However, these discussions have largely centered around member-researcher status and positionality when working with queer populations. Based on insights gathered at multiple ACM events over the past two years, we identified two pressing issues: (1) we need to better support queer people doing HCI research not specific to queer populations, and (2) we need to identify how to best support member-researchers in leading Queer HCI while including collaborators beyond the queer community. This Special Interest Group (SIG) aims to directly address these challenges by convening a broad community of queer researchers and allies, working not only on explicitly-queer topics but across a broad range of HCI topics

Why strong moral cosmopolitanism requires a world-state

The article deals with a pivotal conceptual distinction employed in philosophical discussions about global justice. Cosmopolitans claim that arguing from the perspective of moral cosmopolitanism does not necessarily entail defending a global coercive political authority, or a "world-state", and suggest that ambitious political and economic (social) goals implied in moral cosmopolitanism may be achieved via some kind of non-hierarchical, dispersed and/or decentralised institutional arrangements. I argue that insofar as moral cosmopolitans retain "strong" moral claims, this is an untenable position, and that the goals of cosmopolitan justice, as explicated by its major proponents, require nothing less than a global state-like entity with coercive powers. My background ambition is to supplement some existing works questioning the notion of "governance without government" with an argument that goes right to the conceptual heart of cosmopolitan thought. To embed my central theoretical argument in real-world developments, I draw on some recent scholarship regarding the nature of international organizations, European Union, or transnational democratization. Finally I suggest that only after curbing moral aspirations in the first place can a more self-consciously moderate position be constructed, one that will carry practical and feasible implications for institutional design