DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Standards on Artificial Intelligence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Standards on Artificial Intelligence GLOBAL STANDARDS ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE A report on global legislation & policy positions governing AI technology December 2020 Rahul Rai & Shruti Aji Murali The authors are practicing advocates with a special focus on technology and antitrust/competition law, and may be reached at [email protected] & [email protected] GLOBAL STANDARDS ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................10 INTRODUCTION .........................................................14 Methodology ...........................................................................................15 DEFINITION OF AI ......................................................16 INDIA ...........................................................................................................................................18 USA ..............................................................................................................................................18 CHINA ..........................................................................................................................................19 CANADA ......................................................................................................................................21 UK ................................................................................................................................................21 FRANCE .......................................................................................................................................23 GERMANY ....................................................................................................................................23 RUSSIA ........................................................................................................................................24 ISRAEL .........................................................................................................................................24 DENMARK ....................................................................................................................................25 EU ................................................................................................................................................25 AUSTRALIA ..................................................................................................................................26 JAPAN .........................................................................................................................................26 SINGAPORE .................................................................................................................................27 SOUTH KOREA .............................................................................................................................28 SWEDEN ......................................................................................................................................29 FINLAND ......................................................................................................................................29 SPAIN ..........................................................................................................................................29 NORWAY ......................................................................................................................................30 ESTONIA ......................................................................................................................................30 THE NETHERLANDS ....................................................................................................................31 UAE ..............................................................................................................................................31 HONG KONG ................................................................................................................................32 TRANSPARENCY .........................................................33 MATURITY INDEX ....................................................................................36 GLOBAL STANDARDS ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INDIA ...........................................................................................................................................37 USA ..............................................................................................................................................37 CHINA ..........................................................................................................................................38 CANADA ......................................................................................................................................38 UK ................................................................................................................................................39 FRANCE .......................................................................................................................................40 GERMANY ....................................................................................................................................40 RUSSIA ........................................................................................................................................40 DENMARK ....................................................................................................................................41 EU ................................................................................................................................................41 AUSTRALIA ..................................................................................................................................42 JAPAN .........................................................................................................................................43 SINGAPORE .................................................................................................................................43 SOUTH KOREA .............................................................................................................................44 SWEDEN ......................................................................................................................................44 FINLAND ......................................................................................................................................44 SPAIN ..........................................................................................................................................45 NORWAY ......................................................................................................................................45 ESTONIA ......................................................................................................................................46 THE NETHERLANDS ....................................................................................................................46 UAE ..............................................................................................................................................47 HONG KONG ................................................................................................................................47 INTEROPERABILITY ..................................................49 MATURITY INDEX ....................................................................................52 INDIA ...........................................................................................................................................53 USA ..............................................................................................................................................54 CHINA ..........................................................................................................................................54 CANADA ......................................................................................................................................55 UK ................................................................................................................................................55 FRANCE .......................................................................................................................................56 GERMANY ....................................................................................................................................56 ISRAEL .........................................................................................................................................57 GLOBAL STANDARDS ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DENMARK ....................................................................................................................................57 EU ................................................................................................................................................57 AUSTRALIA ..................................................................................................................................58 SINGAPORE .................................................................................................................................59 SOUTH KOREA .............................................................................................................................59 SWEDEN ......................................................................................................................................59
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Liberal Democratic Civic Education and Rampage School Gun Violence: Why We Need an Alternative Theory of Democracy to Guide Contemporary Civic Education
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2019 Liberal Democratic Civic Education and Rampage School Gun Violence: Why We Need an Alternative Theory of Democracy to Guide Contemporary Civic Education Samantha Deane Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Deane, Samantha, "Liberal Democratic Civic Education and Rampage School Gun Violence: Why We Need an Alternative Theory of Democracy to Guide Contemporary Civic Education" (2019). Dissertations. 3329. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/3329 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2019 Samantha Deane LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC CIVIC EDUCATION AND RAMPAGE SCHOOL GUN VIOLENCE: WHY WE NEED AN ALTERNATIVE THEORY OF DEMOCRACY TO GUIDE CONTEMPORARY CIVIC EDUCATION A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY STUDIES BY SAMANTHA DEANE CHICAGO, IL MAY 2019 Copyright by Samantha Deane, 2019 All rights reserved. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank all of the people who made this dissertation possible, starting with my professors at Loyola University Chicago. I offer a very special thank you to my committee chair, Dr. Amy Shuffelton, whose guidance, support, critical questions, and friendship kept me motivated and on track to complete this project.
    [Show full text]
  • “Pistol Fever”: Regulating Revolvers in Late-Nineteenth-Century Canada"
    Article "“Pistol Fever”: Regulating Revolvers in Late-Nineteenth-Century Canada" Blake Brown Journal of the Canadian Historical Association / Revue de la Société historique du Canada, vol. 20, n° 1, 2009, p. 107-138. Pour citer cet article, utiliser l'information suivante : URI: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/039784ar DOI: 10.7202/039784ar Note : les règles d'écriture des références bibliographiques peuvent varier selon les différents domaines du savoir. Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter à l'URI https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. Érudit offre des services d'édition numérique de documents scientifiques depuis 1998. Pour communiquer avec les responsables d'Érudit : [email protected] Document téléchargé le 12 février 2017 11:48 “Pistol fever”: Regulating Revolvers in Late- nineteenth-Century Canada BLAkE BROwn* Abstract This paper examines the debates over the regulation of pistols in Canada from confederation to the passage of nation’s first Criminal Code in 1892. It demon- strates that gun regulation has long been an important and contentious issue in Canada. Cheap revolvers were deemed a growing danger by the 1870s. A per- ception emerged that new forms of pistols increased the number of shooting accidents, encouraged suicide, and led to murder.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Solutions to American Gun Violence: a Regulatory Framework in Three Parts
    Trinity College Trinity College Digital Repository Trinity Publications (Newspapers, Yearbooks, The Trinity Papers (2011 - present) Catalogs, etc.) 2016 Federal Solutions to American Gun Violence: A Regulatory Framework in Three Parts Brooke Williams Trinity College, Hartford Connecticut Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/trinitypapers Part of the Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Williams, Brooke, "Federal Solutions to American Gun Violence: A Regulatory Framework in Three Parts". The Trinity Papers (2011 - present) (2016). Trinity College Digital Repository, Hartford, CT. https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/trinitypapers/48 Federal Solutions to American Gun Violence: A Regulatory Framework in Three Parts Brooke Williams To the Office of Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), Gun violence remains one of the most prevalent threats to public safety in the United States. Firearm related deaths and injuries occur at an extremely high rate in the United States; it is estimated that “on an average day” almost “88 Americans are killed with guns”, and twice as many Americans are injured.1 There is unanimous outrage at the magnitude of gun violence in the United States; outrage that has become increasingly recurrent in national dialogue. However, this appears to be the only point of consensus in discussions of gun control policy. Attempts at passing comprehensive laws to curb gun violence have failed due to the ideological gridlock that the policy issue creates. The brunt of this ideological gridlock is due to differing perspectives about the significance and utility of firearms. Gun owners view firearms as a means of self-preservation, hunting, sport — and in certain cases — a tool to maintain rural property.
    [Show full text]
  • Gun Crime: the Market in and Use of Illegal Firearms
    Home Office Research Study 298 Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms Gavin Hales, Chris Lewis and Daniel Silverstone The views expressed in this report are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do they reflect Government policy). Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate December 2006 Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms Home Office Research Studies The Home Office Research Studies are reports on research undertaken by or on behalf of the Home Office. They cover the range of subjects for which the Home Secretary has responsibility. Other publications produced by the Research, Development and Statistics include Findings, Statistical Bulletins and Statistical Papers. RDS is part of the Home Office. RDS staff are embedded within delivery groups working closely with front-line staff. The HO Chief Scientific Advisor, who is also Director of RDS, oversees professional development for RDS teams, quality assurance and strategic R & D issues. The Home Office’s purpose is to build a safe, just and tolerant society in which the rights and responsibilities of individuals, families and communities are properly balanced and the protection and security of the public are maintained. RDS includes staff within the Government Statistical Service (GSS). One of the GSS aims is to inform Parliament and the members of the public about the state of the nation and provide a window on the work and performance of government, allowing the impact of government policies and actions to be assessed. Therefore - Research Development and Statistics in the Home Office improves policy making, decision taking and practice in support of the Home Office purpose and aims, to provide the public and Parliament with information necessary for informed debate and to publish information for future use.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Gun Culture and Firearm Laws on Gun Violence and Mass Shootings in the United States
    Lemieux – Effect of Gun Culture and Firearm Laws on Gun Violence and Mass Shootings in the United States Copyright © 2014 International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences (IJCJS) – Official Journal of the South Asian Society of Criminology and Victimology (SASCV) ISSN: 0973-5089 January – June 2014. Vol. 9 (1): 74–93. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the CreativeHTU Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike License,UTH whichT permits unrestricted non- commercial use,T distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ThisT license does not permit commercial exploitation or the creation of derivative works without specific permission. Effect of Gun Culture and Firearm Laws on Gun Violence and Mass Shootings in the United States: A Multi-Level Quantitative Analysis Frederic Lemieux1 The George Washington University, United States of America Abstract This paper examines the merit of two propositions at the center of the debate on gun control in the aftermath of mass shootings in the United States: (1) gun violence and mass shootings are a cultural artifact (gun enthusiast perspective); (2) gun violence and mass shootings are more prevalent due to lax regulations (pro-gun control perspective). To evaluate the value of each proposition, the study provides three levels of cross-sectional analysis that test the relation between gun culture and gun laws on deaths by guns and mass shootings (international and national incidents). The quantitative analyses points out that both cultural and legislative proposition have significant impacts on deaths by guns. While the cultural explanation seems to be related to an increase in deaths by gun, the legislative perspective is associated with a decrease in deaths by gun and mass shootings.
    [Show full text]
  • “Pistol Fever”: Regulating Revolvers in Late-Nineteenth-Century Canada Blake Brown
    Document generated on 10/01/2021 7:59 p.m. Journal of the Canadian Historical Association Revue de la Société historique du Canada “Pistol Fever”: Regulating Revolvers in Late-Nineteenth-Century Canada Blake Brown Volume 20, Number 1, 2009 Article abstract This paper examines the debates over the regulation of pistols in Canada from URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/039784ar confederation to the passage of nation’s first Criminal Code in 1892. It DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/039784ar demonstrates that gun regulation has long been an important and contentious issue in Canada. Cheap revolvers were deemed a growing danger by the 1870s. See table of contents A perception emerged that new forms of pistols increased the number of shooting accidents, encouraged suicide, and led to murder. A special worry was that young, working-class men were adopting pistols to demonstrate their Publisher(s) manliness. Legislators responded to these concerns, but with trepidation. Parliament limited citizens’ right to carry revolvers, required retailers to keep The Canadian Historical Association / La Société historique du Canada records of gun transactions, and banned the sale of pistols to people under 16 years of age. Parliamentarians did not put in place stricter gun laws for several ISSN reasons. Politicians doubted the ability of law enforcement officials to effectively implement firearm laws. Some believed that gun laws would, in 0847-4478 (print) effect, only disarm the law abiding. In addition, a number of leading Canadian 1712-6274 (digital) politicians, most importantly John A. Macdonald, suggested that gun ownership was a right of British subjects grounded in the English Bill of Rights, albeit a Explore this journal right limited to men of property.
    [Show full text]
  • The 35 Annual Meeting of the Macromarketing Society
    The 35th Annual Meeting of the Macromarketing Society Exploring the Frontiers of Macromarketing Papers of the 35th Annual Macromarketing Conference University of Wyoming Laramie, Wyoming, USA June 9-12, 2010 Program Chair: Terri L. Rittenburg, University of Wyoming Arrangements Chair: Mark Peterson, University of Wyoming Conference Sponsors: The Macromarketing Society, Inc. The Daniels Fund, Denver, Colorado School of Energy Resources, University of Wyoming College of Business, University of Wyoming Department of Management & Marketing, University of Wyoming & Journal of Macromarketing i Copyright Statement The Macromarketing Society and the University of Wyoming do not take copyright for papers appearing in the proceedings. The copyright of each abstract or paper in the proceedings belongs to the paper’s author(s). Published by the Macromarketing Society, Inc., in 2010 ISBN 0-9795440-2-5 Cover Photo: Terri Rittenburg ii Table of Contents Track Chairs and Ad Hoc Reviewers ............................................................................................. iv Macromarketing Milestones ......................................................................................................... vii Journal of Macromarketing Charles W. Slater Award Winners ................................................... ix Conference Program ...................................................................................................................... xi Papers and Abstracts ........................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Gun Cultures: the USA and Israel
    افغانستان آزاد – آزاد افغانستان AA-AA چو کشور نباشـد تن من مبـــــــاد بدین بوم وبر زنده یک تن مــــباد همه سر به سر تن به کشتن دهیم از آن به که کشور به دشمن دهیم www.afgazad.com [email protected] زبان های اروپائی European Languages http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/16/gun-cultures-the-usa-and-israel/print/ Gun Cultures: the USA and Israel By Lawrence Davidson October 16, 2015 In the U.S. there are 88 guns floating around for every 100 people, which comes to about 300 million of these weapons in circulation. This includes military-style assault weapons, of which it is estimated there are about 3.75 million in private hands. This state of affairs makes the U.S. the most weaponized modern society on the planet. This weaponized status is not because most Americans want it this way. As President Obama has pointed out, multiple national polls have shown that most Americans want stricter gun control, www.afgazad.com 1 [email protected] but that seems not to matter. Why? Because most Americans are not sufficiently politically organized around this issue to out-lobby the minority who are – mostly in the form of the National Rifle Association (NRA). We are here referring to a rather fanatical, though culturally decisive, minority who define freedom as, first and foremost, the right to “pack” a firearm or two, or ten, ad infinitum. They errantly believe that somehow owning a gun (almost any gun) is “a birthright and an essential part of the nation’s heritage.” They expend much energy on misinterpreting the Second Amendment of the Constitution so as to allegedly prove their point.
    [Show full text]
  • Rampage Shootings and Gun Control
    Rampage Shootings and Gun Control While the causes of rampage violence have been analysed thoroughly in diverse academic disciplines, we hardly know anything about the factors that affect their consequences for public policy. This book addresses rampage shootings in Western Europe and their conditional impact on politicization and policy change in the area of gun control. The author sets out to unravel the factors that facilitate or impede the access of gun control to the political agenda in the wake of rampage shootings and ana- lyses why some political debates lead to profound shifts of the policy status quo, while others peter out without any legislative reactions. In so doing, the book not only contributes to the theoretical literature on crisis- induced policy making, but also provides a wealth of case- study evidence on rampage shootings as empirical phenomena. In particular, the extent to which gun control gets politicized as a policy failure can either result from a bottom-up process (event severity and media pressure) or from a top- down logic (issue ownership and the electoral cycle). Including 12 case studies on the rampage shootings which have triggered a debate over the appropriateness of the affected countries’ gun policies, it illus- trates that the way political processes unfold after rampage shootings depends strongly on specific causal configurations and draws comparisons between the cases covered in the book and the way rampage shootings are typically dealt with in the United States. This text will be of key interest to scholars and students of public policy, policy analysis, European Politics and more broadly of comparative politics, criminology, psychology, and sociology.
    [Show full text]
  • Firearm Localism Abstract
    20.BLOCHER_Final 10/4/2013 11:10 AM Joseph Blocher Firearm Localism abstract. Second Amendment doctrine is largely becoming a line-drawing exercise, as courts try to determine which “Arms” are constitutionally protected, which “people” are permitted to keep and bear them, and in which ways those arms and people can be regulated. But the developing legal regime has yet to account for one potentially significant set of lines: the city limits themselves. In rural areas, gun crime and gun control are relatively rare, and gun culture is strong. In cities, by contrast, rates of violent gun crime are comparatively high, and opportunities for recreational gun use are scarce. And from colonial Boston to nineteenth- century Tombstone to contemporary New York City, guns have consistently been regulated more heavily in cities—a degree of geographic variation that is hard to find with regard to any other constitutional right. This Article argues that Second Amendment doctrine and state preemption laws can and should incorporate these longstanding and sensible differences between urban and rural gun use and regulation. Doing so would present new possibilities for the stalled debate on gun control, protect rural gun culture while permitting cities to address urban gun violence, and preserve the longstanding American tradition of firearm localism. author. Associate Professor, Duke Law School. The Eugene T. Bost, Jr. Research Professorship of the Charles A. Cannon Charitable Trust No. 3 at Duke Law School provided invaluable support for the production of this Article. Many thanks to Stuart Benjamin, Josh Chafetz, Phil Cook, Saul Cornell, Anuj Desai, Jeffrey Fagan, Kristin Goss, Tim Hall, Lester Hunt, Marin K.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Post-World War II American Gun Cultures
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2006 Unholstered and Unquestioned: The Rise of Post- World War II American Gun Cultures Angela Frye Keaton University of Tennessee, Knoxville Recommended Citation Keaton, Angela Frye, "Unholstered and Unquestioned: The Rise of Post-World War II American Gun Cultures. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2006. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4263 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Angela Frye Keaton entitled "Unholstered and Unquestioned: The Rise of Post-World War II American Gun Cultures." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in History. Janis Appier, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: George White, Jr., G. Kurt Piehler Accepted for the Council: Dixie L. Thompson Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) To the Graduate Council: I amsubmitting herewith a dissertation written by AngelaFrye Keaton entitled, "Unholstered andUnquestioned: The Rise of Post-World WarII American Gun Cultures." I have examinedthe finalpaper copy of this dissertation for formand content andrecommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements forthe degreeof Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in History.
    [Show full text]
  • Pervasive Illicit Small Arms Availability: a Global Threat
    HEUNI Paper No. 14 Pervasive Illicit Small Arms Availability: A Global Threat Peter Lock The European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control, affiliated with the United Nations Helsinki, 1999 This document is available electronically from: http://www.vn.fi/om/heuni/ HEUNI The European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control, affiliated with the United Nations P.O.Box 161 FIN-00131 Helsinki Finland Tel: +358-9-18257880 Fax: +358-9-18257890 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.vn.fi/om/heuni/ ISSN 1236-8245 Table of Contents I. Analysis ..........................................................................................................................................4 1. The scope of the problem....................................................................................................................... 4 2. Structural determinants of the general security crisis.......................................................................5 3. The dynamics of privatisation of security........................................................................................... 8 4. The current dynamics of illegal proliferation and intra-societal diffusion of small arms ........... 9 4a) Supply side push: ........................................................................................................................... 10 4b) Demand side economics:............................................................................................................... 11 5. Comprehensive measures to reduce illicit small arms availability..............................................
    [Show full text]