Philosophy Meets Internet Engineering: Ethics in Networked Systems Research. (GTC Workshop Outcomes Paper)

Zevenbergen, Bendert; Mittelstadt, Brent; Véliz, Carissa; Detweiler, Christian; Cath, Corinne; Savulescu, Julian; Whittaker, Meredith

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2666934

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We instead frame it as a position paper, where we also bring in our voices along with the perspectives from the workshop participants. Thus, our paper is similar to other articles in the area of ethics and information technology that relied on a workshop methodology [17,32].…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 61%

Gathering Expert Opinions for Social Robots’ Ethical, Legal, and Societal Concerns: Findings from Four International Workshops

Fosch‐Villaronga

Lutz

Tamò-Larrieux

2019

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social robots, those that exhibit personality and communicate with us using high-level dialogue and natural cues, will soon be part of our daily lives. In this paper, we gather expert opinions from different international workshops exploring ethical, legal, and social (ELS) concerns associated with social robots. In contrast to literature that looks at specific challenges, often from a certain disciplinary angle, our contribution to the literature provides an overview of the ELS discussions in a holistic fashion, shaped by active deliberation with a multitude of experts across four workshops held between 2015 and 2017 held in major international workshops (ERF, NewFriends, JSAI-isAI). It also explores pathways to address the identified challenges. Our contribution is in line with the latest European robot regulatory initiatives but covers an area of research that the latest AI and robot governance strategies have scarcely covered. Specifically, we highlight challenges to the use of social robots from a user perspective, including issues such as privacy, autonomy, and the dehumanization of interactions; or from a worker perspective, including issues such as the possible replacement of jobs through robots. The paper also compiles the recommendations to these ELS issues the experts deem appropriate to mitigate compounding risks. By then contrasting these challenges and solutions with recent AI and robot regulatory strategies, we hope to inform the policy debate and set the scene for further research.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 61%

Gathering Expert Opinions for Social Robots’ Ethical, Legal, and Societal Concerns: Findings from Four International Workshops

Fosch‐Villaronga

Lutz

Tamò-Larrieux

2019

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even more importantly, both Spiekermann's and Vallor's frameworks for virtue ethics in ICT design now play a foundational role in a critical new initiative of the IEEE, "Global Initiative for Ethical Considerations in the Design of Autonomous Systems." 3 This is to say: the endorsements of especially virtue ethics and phronēsis in real-world projects and case studies (Jackson et al, 2015, Zevenbergen et al, 2015 are not simply one-off examples. Rather, given the determining role that the IEEE standards will play for the design and implementation of autonomous systems -the examples provided by Jackson et al and Zevenbergen et al are rather harbingers of things to come.…”

Section: (Philosophy Of) Science: From Subject-object Dichotomies To mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-Machine Communication

Sandry¹

2018

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethics and HMC? From (Positivist) Opposition to Complementarity and Convergence It might be thought that Human-Machine Communication (HMC) and ethics have little, if anything to do with one another. To be sure, those engaged in the more technical sides of HMC-ICT designers, software engineers, roboticists, and so on-are at least nominally beholden to the ethics codes and guidelines of their specific professional organizations (e.g., ACM 1992). But more broadly, ethics and technology have largely been kept separate-until relatively recently. In Part I, I explore these backgrounds and developments in three interrelated ways, beginning with how technological developments themselves help forge dialogue between ethicists and philosophers with computer scientists and engineers: the same pattern is further apparent in the rise of "robo-philosophy" over the past decade or so. Secondly, transformations in our understanding of science have led specifically to conceptions of complementarity between science (as the ground of technology) and ethics. Lastly, these complementarities are instantiated in striking examples of convergence between applied ethics and technical fields emerging from the praxis of contemporary ICT projects and especially contemporary ethics of design-including, finally, emerging requirements for autonomous systems. Across the course of Part I, I will also introduce the primary ethical frameworks that come into play as they emerge in conjunction with specific developments and projects. This approach thereby highlights how these frameworks assume significance and influence "from

show abstract

“…From these vantage points, we can perform measurements to provide a clearer picture of Russia's decentralized control-what is blocked, how it is blocked, and how much variation there is from one ISP to another. We performed measurements from within Russia from 20 different vantage points provided to us by volunteer activists, following established ethical practices to reduce risk [19], [77], [91]. We augment the data collected in Russia with two remote measurements tools-Quack and Satellite [9], [58], [78]-expanding our measurements to over a thousand vantage points within Russia and enabling us to validate our local measurements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralized Control: A Case Study of Russia

Ramesh

Raman

Bernhard

et al. 2020

Proceedings 2020 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until now, censorship research has largely focused on highly centralized networks that rely on government-run technical choke-points, such as the Great Firewall of China. Although it was previously thought to be prohibitively difficult, large-scale censorship in decentralized networks are on the rise. Our in-depth investigation of the mechanisms underlying decentralized information control in Russia shows that such large-scale censorship can be achieved in decentralized networks through inexpensive commodity equipment. This new form of information control presents a host of problems for censorship measurement, including difficulty identifying censored content, requiring measurements from diverse perspectives, and variegated censorship mechanisms that require significant effort to identify in a robust manner. By working with activists on the ground in Russia, we obtained five leaked blocklists signed by Roskomnadzor, the Russian government's federal service for mass communications, along with seven years of historical blocklist data. This authoritative list contains domains, IPs, and subnets that ISPs have been required to block since November 1st, 2012. We used the blocklist from April 24 2019, that contains 132,798 domains, 324,695 IPs, and 39 subnets, to collect active measurement data from residential, data center and infrastructural vantage points. Our vantage points span 408 unique ASes that control ≈ 65% of Russian IP address space. Our findings suggest that data centers block differently from the residential ISPs both in quantity and in method of blocking, resulting in different experiences of the Internet for residential network perspectives and data center perspectives. As expected, residential vantage points experience high levels of censorship. While we observe a range of blocking techniques, such as TCP/IP blocking, DNS manipulation, or keyword based filtering, we find that residential ISPs are more likely to inject blockpages with explicit notices to users when censorship is enforced. Russia's censorship architecture is a blueprint, and perhaps a forewarning of what and how national censorship policies could be implemented in many other countries that have similarly diverse ISP ecosystems to Russia's. Understanding decentralized control will be key to continuing to preserve Internet freedom for years to come.

show abstract

Philosophy Meets Internet Engineering: Ethics in Networked Systems Research. (GTC Workshop Outcomes Paper)

Abstract: Weighing risks, benefits and values for an ethical analysis ..

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Gathering Expert Opinions for Social Robots’ Ethical, Legal, and Societal Concerns: Findings from Four International Workshops

Gathering Expert Opinions for Social Robots’ Ethical, Legal, and Societal Concerns: Findings from Four International Workshops

Human-Machine Communication

Decentralized Control: A Case Study of Russia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About