Policy 11.Qxd.Qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Policy 11.Qxd.Qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 1 70 AICGSPOLICYREPORT COOPERATION OR DIVISION? THE GERMAN-AMERICAN RELATIONSHIP IN A CHANGING WORLD Melissa K. Griffith Danielle Piatkiewicz Thomas Hanley Philipp Stelzel Anne Jenichen Ines Wagner AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 68329 AICGS_TXT.qxp_policy 11.qxd.qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 1 Table of Contents Foreword 3 The American Institute for Contemporary German Studies strengthens the German-American rela- About the Authors 4 tionship in an evolving Europe and changing world. The Institute produces objective and original analyses of developments and trends in Germany, Transatlantic Relations, the Liberal Democratic Order, Europe, and the United States; creates new transatlantic networks; and facilitates dialogue and the Populist Challenge among the business, political, and academic Philipp Stelzel 7 communities to manage differences and define and promote common interests. ©2019 by the American Institute for Mind the Technology Gap: The Importance of Technological Contemporary German Studies Literacy Amid Transatlantic Strife ISBN 978-1-933942-65-0 Thomas Hanley 15 ADDITIONAL COPIES: Additional Copies of this Policy Report are available for $10.00 to cover postage and handling from The Geoeconomics of Digitalization: Future-Proofing the the American Institute for Contemporary German Transatlantic Relationship Studies, 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036. Tel: 202/332-9312, Melissa K. Griffith 25 E-mail: [email protected] Please consult our website for a list of online publications: http://www.aicgs.org The views expressed in this publication are those Future-Proofing the Workforce: A German and American of the author(s) alone. They do not necessarily Perspective reflect the views of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies. Ines Wagner 35 How To Be “Wunderbar Together”: Strengthening the U.S.-German Relationship through Civil Society Cooperation Anne Jenichen and Danielle Piatkiewicz 43 Program Participants 57 Support for this publication was generously provided by: TRANSATLANTIC PROGRAM OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY with Funds through the European Recovery Program (ERP) of the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy 68329 AICGS_TXT.qxp_policy 11.qxd.qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 2 68329 AICGS_TXT.qxp_policy 11.qxd.qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 3 COOPERATION OR DIVISION? FOREWORD AICGS is pleased to present the written results of the third and final year of its project “A German- American Dialogue of the Next Generation: Global Responsibility, Joint Engagement.” The six authors together with several other young Americans and Germans engaged with each other during the course of 2018-2019 in discussions to identify solutions to global issues of concern for the transatlantic relationship. The purpose of the project is to emphasize the important role of the next generation of transatlantic leaders and experts and to give them a platform and voice in the critical dialogue of crucial global issues that require joint transatlantic attention and solutions. The project participants come from a variety of disciplines and have a wide array of expertise. Representing the three AICGS program areas—Foreign & Domestic Policy; Geoeconomics; and Society, Culture & Politics—the participants formulated a set of recommendations that were presented in a variety of venues and through innovative means. The essays presented in this Policy Report summarize the outcome of a year-long engagement with current critical transatlantic issues, which include challenges and opportunities related to the digital transformation, the future of work and education of the workforce, the rise of China as a global player, the growing influence of Russia, populism, the energy transition, European defense capabilities, transatlantic security cooperation, the inclusion of minority and immigrant populations, as well as the role of civil society in strengthening the transatlantic alliance. The project’s goal has been to highlight the perspectives of the next generation of transatlanticists and to broaden the public debate about important issues. Digital media form a crucial element of the project. With frequent blogs, virtual meetings, tweets, and videos, AICGS is targeting new and established generations in order to draw them into the fold of the transatlantic circle. The project ultimately hopes to contribute to maintaining and expanding the transatlantic bond between the United States and Germany during and beyond a period of fraught relations. AICGS is grateful to this year’s participants for their enthusiasm and engagement as well as their innovative and creative contributions, which have made this project such a success. For more information about the program, please visit the AICGS website at https://www.aicgs.org/project/a-german-american-dialogue-of-the-next-generation-2018- 2019/. AICGS is grateful to the Transatlantic Program of the Federal Republic of Germany with Funds through the European Recovery Program (ERP) of the Federal Ministry for Economics and Energy (BMWi) for its generous support of this program. In addition, AICGS was pleased to be able to include the third year of the project in the “Deutschlandjahr USA” initiative of the German Federal Foreign Office. Susanne Dieper Director of Programs and Grants AICGS 3 68329 AICGS_TXT.qxp_policy 11.qxd.qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 4 COOPERATION OR DIVISION? ABOUT THE AUTHORS Melissa K. Griffith is a PhD Candidate in Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley and an affiliated researcher at the Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity (CLTC). Her doctoral research lies at the intersection of security and technology, with a focus on national defense in cyberspace. Her broader research interests include cybersecurity, digitalization, transatlantic relations, and small states’ national defense postures. She was a Visiting Scholar at George Washington University's Institute for International Science & Technology Policy (IISTP) in October 2018; a Visiting Research Fellow at the Research Institute on the Finnish Economy (ETLA) in Helsinki, Finland from 2017-2018; and a Visiting Researcher at the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) in Brussels, Belgium in Fall 2017. Ms. Griffith’s published work has appeared in the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, Business and Politics, the Centre for European Policy Studies, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Cyber Conflict Studies Association, and the Journal of Cyber Policy. In addition to academic conferences, she has presented her work for the World Affairs Council, the Research Institute on the Finnish Economy (ETLA), the Cyber Conflict Studies Association (CCSA), and Sift Science Resources. She holds a BA in International Relations from Agnes Scott College (2011) and an MA in Political Science from the University of California, Berkeley (2014). Thomas Hanley is a research assistant with the Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi) in Berlin, where he provides research and project support to the Institute’s work on multilateral coalition building, the changing global order, technological sovereignty issues, and authoritarian challenges to liberal democracies. During the 2017-2018 academic year, Mr. Hanley taught at the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt as a graduate assistant and was an Atlantic Expedition Fellow with the Berlin-based Atlantische Initiative, an organization working to improve transatlantic relations. Mr. Hanley holds a Bachelor’s degree in political science from Boston College, where his thesis examined the relationship between European radical right-wing parties and xenophobic violence. He speaks English and German, and has previous work experience with the United States Department of State in Brussels, Belgium and with R/GA Digital Advertising, working on its Nike account in London, England. Anne Jenichen is Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Politics and International Relations at the Aston Centre for Europe, Aston University, Birmingham, UK. Her research focuses on the political impact of international norms and organizations; European human rights policy; the rights of disadvantaged groups, such as women and religious minorities; and on the politicization of religion in Europe. She holds a Diploma (equivalent to an MA) in Political Science from Free University Berlin and a PhD in Political Science from the University of Bremen, Germany, where she also taught political science and European studies before joining Aston. She was Volkswagen Foundation Fellow at the Transatlantic Academy in Washington, DC (2014-15), Visiting Research Fellow at the Institut d‘Études Européennes, Université Libre de Bruxelles (2011), Research Fellow at the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) in Geneva (2007-09), and Visiting Fellow at the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Northeastern University, Boston (2007). For the Heinrich Böll Foundation in Berlin, she coordinated an international research project on “Religion, Politics, and Gender Equality” (2007-2010). 4 68329 AICGS_TXT.qxp_policy 11.qxd.qxd 6/7/19 12:44 PM Page 5 COOPERATION OR DIVISION? Danielle Piatkiewicz is a senior program coordinator for The German Marshall Fund of the United States’ (GMF) Asia and the Future of Geopolitics program. In these roles, she is responsible for managing and coordinating the Asia program’s portfolio on U.S. and EU relations with China, Japan, and India on economic, trade, security, and defense issues.
Recommended publications
  • AI PRINCIPLES in CONTEXT: Tensions and Opportunities for the United States and China
    Written by Jessica Cussins Newman August 2020 AI PRINCIPLES IN CONTEXT: Tensions and Opportunities for the United States and China INTRODUCTION Over the past five years, awareness of the transformative impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) on societies, policies, and economies around the world has been increasing. Unique challenges posed by AI include the rise of synthetic media (text, audio, images, and video content);1 insufficient transparency in the automation of decision making in complex environments;2 the amplification of social biases from training data and design GAINING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF choices, causing disparate outcomes for 3 THE CULTURAL AND POLITICAL CONTEXT different races, genders, and other groups; and SURROUNDING KEY AI PRINCIPLES CAN the vulnerability of AI models to cyberattacks HELP CLARIFY WHICH PRINCIPLES PROVIDE such as data poisoning.4 Awareness of these and PRODUCTIVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR numerous other challenges has led to serious POTENTIAL COOPERATION. deliberation about the principles needed to guide AI development and use. By some counts, there are now more than 160 AI principles and guidelines globally.5 Because these principles have emerged from different stakeholders with unique histories and motivations, their style and substance vary. Some documents include recommendations or voluntary commitments, while a smaller subset includes binding agreements or enforcement mechanisms. Despite the differences, arguably a consensus has also been growing around key thematic trends, including privacy, accountability, safety and security, transparency and explainability (meaning that the results and decisions made by an AI system can be understood by humans), fairness and nondiscrimination, human control of technology, professional responsibility, and promotion of human values.6 However, in the face of complex and growing the United States and China.
    [Show full text]
  • Authors' Pre-Publication Copy Dated March 7, 2021 This Article Has Been
    Authors’ pre-publication copy dated March 7, 2021 This article has been accepted for publication in Volume 19, Issue 1 of the Northwestern Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property (Fall 2021) Artificial Intelligence as Evidence1 ABSTRACT This article explores issues that govern the admissibility of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) applications in civil and criminal cases, from the perspective of a federal trial judge and two computer scientists, one of whom also is an experienced attorney. It provides a detailed yet intelligible discussion of what AI is and how it works, a history of its development, and a description of the wide variety of functions that it is designed to accomplish, stressing that AI applications are ubiquitous, both in the private and public sector. Applications today include: health care, education, employment-related decision-making, finance, law enforcement, and the legal profession. The article underscores the importance of determining the validity of an AI application (i.e., how accurately the AI measures, classifies, or predicts what it is designed to), as well as its reliability (i.e., the consistency with which the AI produces accurate results when applied to the same or substantially similar circumstances), in deciding whether it should be admitted into evidence in civil and criminal cases. The article further discusses factors that can affect the validity and reliability of AI evidence, including bias of various types, “function creep,” lack of transparency and explainability, and the sufficiency of the objective testing of the AI application before it is released for public use. The article next provides an in-depth discussion of the evidentiary principles that govern whether AI evidence should be admitted in court cases, a topic which, at present, is not the subject of comprehensive analysis in decisional law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Technology in Online Misinformation Sarah Kreps
    THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN ONLINE MISINFORMATION SARAH KREPS JUNE 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY States have long interfered in the domestic politics of other states. Foreign election interference is nothing new, nor are misinformation campaigns. The new feature of the 2016 election was the role of technology in personalizing and then amplifying the information to maximize the impact. As a 2019 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report concluded, malicious actors will continue to weaponize information and develop increasingly sophisticated tools for personalizing, targeting, and scaling up the content. This report focuses on those tools. It outlines the logic of digital personalization, which uses big data to analyze individual interests to determine the types of messages most likely to resonate with particular demographics. The report speaks to the role of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and neural networks in creating tools that distinguish quickly between objects, for example a stop sign versus a kite, or in a battlefield context, a combatant versus a civilian. Those same technologies can also operate in the service of misinformation through text prediction tools that receive user inputs and produce new text that is as credible as the original text itself. The report addresses potential policy solutions that can counter digital personalization, closing with a discussion of regulatory or normative tools that are less likely to be effective in countering the adverse effects of digital technology. INTRODUCTION and machine learning about user behavior to manipulate public opinion, allowed social media Meddling in domestic elections is nothing new as bots to target individuals or demographics known a tool of foreign influence.
    [Show full text]
  • Whose Streets? Our Streets! (Tech Edition)
    TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLIC PURPOSE PROJECT Whose Streets? Our Streets! (Tech Edition) 2020-21 “Smart City” Cautionary Trends & 10 Calls to Action to Protect and Promote Democracy Rebecca Williams REPORT AUGUST 2021 Technology and Public Purpose Project Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org/TAPP Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Cover image: Les Droits de l’Homme, Rene Magritte 1947 Design and layout by Andrew Facini Copyright 2021, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLIC PURPOSE PROJECT Whose Streets? Our Streets! (Tech Edition) 2020-21 “Smart City” Cautionary Trends & 10 Calls to Action to Protect and Promote Democracy Rebecca Williams REPORT AUGUST 2021 Acknowledgments This report culminates my research on “smart city” technology risks to civil liberties as part of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs’ Technology and Public Purpose (TAPP) Project. The TAPP Project works to ensure that emerging technologies are developed and managed in ways that serve the overall public good. I am grateful to the following individuals for their inspiration, guidance, and support: Liz Barry, Ash Carter, Kade Crockford, Susan Crawford, Karen Ejiofor, Niva Elkin-Koren, Clare Garvie and The Perpetual Line-Up team for inspiring this research, Kelsey Finch, Ben Green, Gretchen Greene, Leah Horgan, Amritha Jayanti, Stephen Larrick, Greg Lindsay, Beryl Lipton, Jeff Maki, Laura Manley, Dave Maass, Dominic Mauro, Hunter Owens, Kathy Pettit, Bruce Schneier, Madeline Smith who helped so much wrangling all of these examples, Audrey Tang, James Waldo, Sarah Williams, Kevin Webb, Bianca Wylie, Jonathan Zittrain, my fellow TAPP fellows, and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • From the GDPR) the United States Should Adopt to Advance Economic Justice
    Five Privacy Principles (from the GDPR) the United States Should Adopt To Advance Economic Justice Michele E. Gilman* ABSTRACT Algorithmic profiling technologies are impeding the economic security of low-income people in the United States. Based on their digital profiles, low- income people are targeted for predatory marketing campaigns and financial products. At the same time, algorithmic decision-making can result in their exclusion from mainstream employment, housing, financial, health care, and educational opportunities. Government agencies are turning to algorithms to apportion social services, yet these algorithms lack transparency, leaving thousands of people adrift without state support and not knowing why. Marginalized communities are also subject to disproportionately high levels of surveillance, including facial recognition technology and the use of predictive policing software. American privacy law is no bulwark against these profiling harms, instead placing the onus of protecting personal data on individuals while leaving government and businesses largely free to collect, analyze, share, and sell personal data. By contrast, in the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) gives EU residents numerous, enforceable rights to control their personal data. Spurred in part by the GDPR, Congress is debating whether to adopt comprehensive privacy legislation in the United States. This article contends that the GDPR contains several provisions that have the potential to limit digital discrimination against the poor, while enhancing their economic stability and mobility. The GDPR provides the following: (1) the right to an explanation about automated decision-making; (2) the right not to be subject to decisions based solely on automated profiling; (3) the right to be forgotten; (4) opportunities for public participation in data processing programs; and (5) robust implementation * Venable Professor of Law and Director, Saul Ewing Civil Advocacy Clinic, University of Baltimore School of Law; Faculty Fellow, Data & Society.
    [Show full text]
  • AI Now Report 2018
    AI Now Report 2018 Meredith Whittaker​, AI Now Institute, New York University, Google Open Research Kate Crawford​, AI Now Institute, New York University, Microsoft Research Roel Dobbe​, AI Now Institute, New York University Genevieve Fried​, AI Now Institute, New York University Elizabeth Kaziunas​, AI Now Institute, New York University Varoon Mathur​, AI Now Institute, New York University Sarah Myers West​, AI Now Institute, New York University Rashida Richardson​, AI Now Institute, New York University Jason Schultz​, AI Now Institute, New York University School of Law Oscar Schwartz​, AI Now Institute, New York University With research assistance from Alex Campolo and Gretchen Krueger (AI Now Institute, New York University) DECEMBER 2018 CONTENTS ABOUT THE AI NOW INSTITUTE 3 RECOMMENDATIONS 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 INTRODUCTION 10 1. THE INTENSIFYING PROBLEM SPACE 12 1.1 AI is Amplifying Widespread Surveillance 12 The faulty science and dangerous history of affect recognition 13 ​Facial recognition amplifies civil rights concerns 15 1.2 The Risks of Automated Decision Systems in Government 18 1.3 Experimenting on Society: Who Bears the Burden? 22 2. EMERGING SOLUTIONS IN 2018 24 2.1 Bias Busting and Formulas for Fairness: the Limits of Technological “Fixes” 24 ​Broader approaches 27 2.2 Industry Applications: Toolkits and System Tweaks 28 2.3 Why Ethics is Not Enough 29 3. WHAT IS NEEDED NEXT 32 3.1 From Fairness to Justice 32 3.2 Infrastructural Thinking 33 3.3 Accounting for Hidden Labor in AI Systems 34 3.4 Deeper Interdisciplinarity 36 3.5 Race, Gender and Power in AI 37 3.6 Strategic Litigation and Policy Interventions 39 3.7 Research and Organizing: An Emergent Coalition 40 CONCLUSION 42 ENDNOTES 44 This work is licensed under a ​Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License 2 ABOUT THE AI NOW INSTITUTE The AI Now Institute at New York University is an interdisciplinary research institute dedicated to understanding the social implications of AI technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Data for Peacebuilding and Prevention Ecosystem Mapping
    October 2020 DATA FOR PEACEBUILDING AND PREVENTION Ecosystem Mapping The State of Play and the Path to Creating a Com- munity of Practice Branka Panic ABOUT THE CENTER ON INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION The Center on International Cooperation (CIC) is a non-profit research center housed at New York University. Our vision is to advance effective multilateral action to prevent crises and build peace, justice, and inclusion. Our mission is to strengthen cooperative approaches among national governments, international organizations, and the wider policy community to advance peace, justice, and inclusion. Acknowledgments The NYU Center on International Cooperation is grateful for the support of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs for this initiative. We also offer a special thanks to interviewees for their time and support at various stages of this research, and to an Expert Group convened to discuss the report findings: Bas Bijlsma, Christina Goodness, Gregor Reisch, Jacob Lefton, Lisa Schirch, Merve Hickok, Monica Nthiga, and Thierry van der Horst. CITATION: This report should be cited as: Branka Panic, Data for Peacebuilding and Prevention Ecosystem Mapping: The State of Play and the Path to Creating a Community of Practice (New York: NYU Center on International Cooperation, 2020). Contents Summary . 1 Terminology........................................................................ 4 Introduction: Objectives and Methodology ............................................. 5 Objectives.....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Next Generation of Cyber-Enabled Information Warfare
    2020 12th International Conference on Cyber Conflict Permission to make digital or hard copies of this publication for internal use within NATO and for personal or educational use when for non-profit or 20/20 Vision: The Next Decade non-commercial purposes is granted providing that copies bear this notice T. Jančárková, L. Lindström, and a full citation on the first page. Any other reproduction or transmission M. Signoretti, I. Tolga, G. Visky (Eds.) requires prior written permission by NATOCCD COE. 2020 © NATO CCDCOE Publications, Tallinn The Next Generation of Cyber-Enabled Information Warfare Kim Hartmann Keir Giles Conflict Studies Research Centre Conflict Studies Research Centre [email protected] [email protected] Abstract: Malign influence campaigns leveraging cyber capabilities have caused significant political disruption in the United States and elsewhere; but the next generation of campaigns could be considerably more damaging as a result of the widespread use of machine learning. Current methods for successfully waging these campaigns depend on labour-intensive human interaction with targets. The introduction of machine learning, and potentially artificial intelligence (AI), will vastly enhance capabilities for automating the reaching of mass audiences with tailored and plausible content. Consequently, they will render malicious actors even more powerful. Tools for making use of machine learning in information operations are developing at an extraordinarily rapid pace, and are becoming rapidly more available and affordable for a much wider variety of users. Until early 2018 it was assumed that the utilisation of AI methods by cyber criminals was not to be expected soon, because those methods rely on vast datasets, correspondingly vast computational power, or both, and demanded highly specialised skills and knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Tackling Deepfakes in European Policy
    Tackling deepfakes in European policy STUDY Panel for the Future of Science and Technology EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA) PE 690.039 – July 2021 EN Tackling deepfakes in European policy The emergence of a new generation of digitally manipulated media capable of generating highly realistic videos – also known as deepfakes – has generated substantial concerns about possible misuse. In response to these concerns, this report assesses the technical, societal and regulatory aspects of deepfakes. The assessment of the underlying technologies for deepfake videos, audio and text synthesis shows that they are developing rapidly, and are becoming cheaper and more accessible by the day. The rapid development and spread of deepfakes is taking place within the wider context of a changing media system. An assessment of the risks associated with deepfakes shows that they can be psychological, financial and societal in nature, and their impacts can range from the individual to the societal level. The report identifies five dimensions of the deepfake lifecycle that policy-makers could take into account to prevent and address the adverse impacts of deepfakes. The legislative framework on artificial intelligence (AI) proposed by the European Commission presents an opportunity to mitigate some of these risks, although regulation should not focus on the technological dimension of deepfakes alone. The report includes policy options under each of the five dimensions, which could be incorporated into the AI legislative framework, the proposed European Union digital services act package and beyond. A combination of measures will likely be necessary to limit the risks of deepfakes, while harnessing their potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Intelligence and Disinformation How AI Changes the Way Disinformation Is Produced, Disseminated, and Can Be Countered
    security and human rights 29 (2018) 55-81 brill.com/shrs Artificial Intelligence and Disinformation How AI Changes the Way Disinformation is Produced, Disseminated, and Can Be Countered Katarina Kertysova* George F. Kennan Fellow, Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson Center [email protected] Abstract This article explores the challenges and opportunities presented by advances in artifi- cial intelligence (AI) in the context of information operations. The article first exam- ines the ways in which AI can be used to counter disinformation online. It then dives into some of the limitations of AI solutions and threats associated with AI techniques, namely user profiling, micro-targeting, and deep fakes. Finally, the paper reviews a number of solutions that could help address the spread of AI-powered disinformation and improve the online environment. The article recognises that in the fight against disinformation, there is no single fix. The next wave of disinformation calls first and foremost for societal resilience. Keywords disinformation – artificial intelligence – deep fakes – algorithms – profiling – micro-targeting – automated fact-checking – social media 1 Introduction In recent years, Western democracies have been grappling with a mix of cyber- attacks, information operations, political and social subversion, exploitation of * This report was written with research and editorial support of Eline Chivot, Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for Data Innovation. Opinions expressed in the article are solely those of the author. © Katarina Kertysova, 2019 | doi:10.1163/18750230-02901005 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the prevailing cc-by-nc license at the time of publication. Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 04:22:02AM via free access <UN> 56 Kertysova existing tensions within their societies, and malign financial influence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70
    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70 Putting Human Rights at the Heart of the Design, Development and Deployment of Artificial Intelligence 2 THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AT 70 PUTTING HUMAN RIGHTS AT THE HEART OF THE DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEPLOYMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 20 December 2018 This report was written by Lorna McGregor, Vivian Ng and Ahmed Shaheed with Elena Abrusci, Catherine Kent, Daragh Murray and Carmel Williams. The report greatly benefited from the insightful comments and suggestions by Laura Carter, Jane Connors, Eimear Farrell, Geoff Gilbert, Sabrina Rau and Maurice Sunkin. The Human Rights, Big Data and Technology Project 3 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 INTRODUCTION 7 I. THE IMPACT OF BIG DATA AND AI ON HUMAN RIGHTS 11 A. The Role of the Rights of Equality, Non-Discrimination and Privacy as Gatekeepers to All Human Rights ..... 11 1. The Rights to Equality and Non-Discrimination ...............................................................................................................................11 2. The Right to Privacy .........................................................................................................................................................................14 B. THE HUMAN RIGHTS’ IMPACT OF THE USE OF BIG DATA AND AI IN KEY SECTORS ......................................... 17 1. The Impact of Big Data and AI on the Right to Education ...............................................................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Modernizing Authentication Standards for Digital Video Evidence in the Era of Deepfakes
    American University Law Review Volume 69 Issue 6 Article 5 2020 A Break From Reality: Modernizing Authentication Standards for Digital Video Evidence in the Era of Deepfakes John P. LaMonaga American University Washington College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Evidence Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation LaMonaga, John P. (2020) "A Break From Reality: Modernizing Authentication Standards for Digital Video Evidence in the Era of Deepfakes," American University Law Review: Vol. 69 : Iss. 6 , Article 5. Available at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol69/iss6/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Break From Reality: Modernizing Authentication Standards for Digital Video Evidence in the Era of Deepfakes Abstract The legal standard for authenticating photographic and video evidence in court has remained largely static throughout the evolution of media technology in the twentieth century. The advent of “deepfakes,” or fake videos created using artificial intelligence programming, renders outdated many of the assumptions that the Federal Rules of Evidence are built upon. Rule 901(b)(1) provides a means to authenticate evidence through the testimony of a “witness with knowledge.” Courts commonly admit photographic and video evidence by using the “fair and accurate portrayal” standard to meet this Rule’s intent.
    [Show full text]