• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Philosophy & technology >Algo-Rhythms and the Beat of the Legal Drum
【24h】

Algo-Rhythms and the Beat of the Legal Drum

机译：算法节奏与合法鼓声

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The paper focuses on concerns and legal challenges brought on by the use of algorithms. A particular class of algorithms that augment or replace analysis and decisionmaking by humans, i.e. data analytics and machine learning, is under scrutiny. Taking into account Balkin's work on "the laws of an algorithmic society", attention is drawn to obligations of transparency, matters of due process, and accountability. This US-centric analysis on drawbacks and loopholes of current legal systems is complemented with the analysis of noons and principles of the EU data protection law, or "GDPR". The aim is twofold. On the one hand, the intent is to shed light on some crucial differences between the US and EU law on the regulation of algorithmic operators, both public and private. Whereas, in the USA, scholars debate whether and to what extent new duties and responsibilities of algorithmic operators, e.g. information fiduciaries, have to amend the current framework of self-regulation and light government-as shown by the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy report from November 2016-in EU law much of the new duties and responsibilities of algorithmic operators have been passed upon them as data controllers. Whether such approaches will successfully tackle the normative challenges of the algorithmic society is, on the other hand, an open issue that will likely represent the main topic of debate over the next years. Disagreement may concern: (ⅰ) the terms framing the legal question in e.g. statistical purposes of the data processing; (ⅱ) how such terms are related to each other in legal reasoning (e.g. a right to explanation as valid law in the EU); and (ⅲ) legal hard cases that will increasingly have to do with the principles that are at stake also but not only in data protection (e.g. informational self-determination). By entrusting such legal hard cases to algorithms, or some sort of smart artificial agent, humans still bear full responsibility for the judgment of what is socially, ethically, and legally "plain" and "hard" in social affairs. The balance between delegation of decisions to algorithms and nondelegation will be the leitmotiv of the algorithmic society. Since the devil is in the detail, the current paper is devoted to some of them.
机译：本文重点讨论了算法使用带来的关注和法律挑战。正在审查一类特定的算法，以增强或替代人类的分析和决策，即数据分析和机器学习。考虑到Balkin关于“算法社会的法律”的工作，请注意透明性义务，正当程序问题和问责制。这种以美国为中心的对当前法律制度的弊端和漏洞的分析，与对欧盟数据保护法（“ GDPR”）的正午和原则的分析相辅相成。目的是双重的。一方面，其目的是阐明美国和欧盟法律之间对算法运算符（公共和私有）的监管之间的一些关键差异。而在美国，学者们在争论算法运算符的新职责和职责是否以及在何种程度上，例如信息受托人必须修改当前的自我监管和轻度政府框架，如2016年11月白宫科学技术政策办公室报告所显示的那样-欧盟法律已经通过了算法运算符的许多新职责将它们作为数据控制器。另一方面，这种方法是否能够成功应对算法社会的规范挑战是一个未决的问题，很可能代表着未来几年辩论的主题。争议可能涉及：（ⅰ）构成法律问题的术语，例如数据处理的统计目的； （ⅱ）这些术语在法律推理中如何相互关联（例如，在欧盟具有作为有效法律的解释权）； （ⅲ）越来越多的法律纠纷案件不仅与数据保护（例如，信息自决）有关，而且与危险的原则息息相关。通过将这种法律上的困难案件委托给算法或某种智能人工代理，人类仍然承担着对社会事务中的“普通”和“硬”行为进行社会，道德和法律判断的全部责任。将决策委派给算法与不委派之间的平衡将是算法社会的主旨。由于细节是魔鬼，因此本文只针对其中的一些内容。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号