Otp send successfully..
  •  Proposals
    •  View Proposals
    •  Create Proposal
  •  Votes
    •  View Ongoing Votes
    •  Accepted
    •  Rejected
  •  World Parliament
    •  Assembly
    •  Parliament
    •  FAQ
  •  
    • Register
    • Login

Unsuccessful initiative

  1. Home
  2. Archive
  3. Human Rights
  4. AI Technologies vs. Human Rights
October 27, 2020 Human Rights

AI Technologies vs. Human Rights

64 3

Prevent AI technologies from being used to assist authoritarian governments and their human rights abuse

This campaign calls upon democracies to denounce, sanction, and prevent AI technologies from being exploited by authoritarian governments to advance their human rights violation at home and abroad. Such technologies include facial recognition and surveillance apparatus — in both hardware and software capabilities.

Democracies should seek to promote global standards of technologies that are grounded in the human dignity and universal values, particularly those prone to misuse by oppresive governments, including, but not limited to, China.

"China is the leading user of technology as a means of oppression." says economic analyst Christopher Balding. About 200 million surveillance cameras are deployed around the country. Nearly every one of its 1.4 billion citizens is in China’s facial recognition database. That doesn not include Xinjiang, where over 1 million Uighur Muslims have been detained in re-education camps designed to rid the region of its Uighur identity and culture for generations to come. There, technologies like facial recognition and invasive personal data collections, are used at the very least as an instrument of fear, if not precisely tracking the Uighur population at all times.

Such technologies are not just privy to certain economic powers, they become increasingly attractive wholesale items and are being exported from China to countries like Venezuela, Kyrgyzstan, the Philippines, and Zimbabwe — for the same oppressive ends.

This campaign is threefold in addressing this topic:

  1. Democratic governments and tech communities have a chance to shape the design of these sensitive technologies, as well as promote global standards, in ways that can isolate opague authoritarian practices.
  2. Increasing targeted sanctions for individuals, companies, government-sponsored entities who are complicit in such abuses.
  3. In AI education and research, universities in democracies should adapt greater, more serious moral discourse in their curriculum, and set code of ethics when dealing with entities (explicity and implicitly) sponsored by oppresive states.

 

References:

The Human Rights Watch

Slate

 

VOTE
DISCUSSION
  1. user avatar
    October 28, 2020
    mcw

    As for ethical guidelines, I fully agree, but see a similar problem as in internet governance: Which authority shoud have the right to supervise and channel this deliberation process and, even more tricky, how should finally be decided on such standards? I feel dealing with both questions is not like lawmaking but needs to be dealt with on a meta level, i.e. like setting the framework for lawmaking.So maybe looking into comparable processes in history may help.

    As for shaping the AI designing process, I think there will be similar issues. The main challenge seems to me the high complexity of AI development as it deals with consciousness. So, there should in my opinion be no limitation to the development process but governance when it comes to applying the results,

    1. user avatar
      October 28, 2020
      wyue

      I agree. I don't think it should be an issue of solely governance or jurisprudence. What's why the campaign makes no mention of government restrictions on AI development, instead I suggest a collaborative approach to set standards in line with universal human values that democracies in the world already so claim to champion, which will rely on the private sector, civil discourse, as much as government stewardship.

      If I may take China as a promient example again. Many global industries (not just in tech) already have long-running standards set by US, UK, Europe, and other developed regions. These are not neccesarily guidedd by law, but by wills of the private sector. But the Chinese Communist Party has put forth its vision to challenge and replace these existing global standards by a blueprint called "Made in China 2025", in its usual opague and ambitious manner. Unlike mainstream narratives around this impending clash, I do not think about it in terms of an economic power tussle, but as a collision of human principles. To address that, governments will not be enough or even appropriate at times. So the goal of this campaign is to galvanise civil society, private industries, public awareness, in stead of a top-down legal approach. 

      Having said that, I'd like to raise one example of how government mandated sanctions can be a useful instrument. During the summer, using the framework of Magnitsky Act, the US government imposed targeted sanctions on Chinese firms and individuals that are complicit in the human rights violations in Xinjiang. This effectively banned dealings between the sanctioned entities and American tech companies like Apple, Google, and HP. It might appear small in its practical effect, but the cost of reputation and public image can be a stronger currency than money itself.

       

  2. user avatar
    October 28, 2020
    naomi.flores99

    I support this iniciative!

NEW COMMENT
Only registered users can comment on this initiative! Please login or register to continue.
Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn
user avatar
wyue

Rejected by Category
  • UN General Resolutions 322
  • Security & Conflict Resolution 232
  • Human Rights 137
  • Economy 9
  • Miscellaneous 9
  • Environment 9
  • Research & Education 4
  • Health 2
  • Gender Equality 1
  • United Kingdom 1404
  • Norway 1047
  • Sweden 772
  • Ireland 612
  • Canada 486
  • Australia 348
  • United States 347
  • Chile 308
  • Argentina 173
  • Germany 156
  • Jamaica 109
  • India 44
  • Italy 17
Countries with most Citizens

This project is organized by the World Parliament Experiment e. V. Logo World Parliament Experiment e.V.

and supported by Democracy Without Borders Logo Democracy Without Borders

Copyright © All rights reserved | This template is made with by Colorlib

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy
  • Rules
  • FAQ/Help
  • Legal Notice