First Global Forum on Ethics of AI held in Prague, one year after the adoption of UNESCO’s global recommendation; UNESCO, To Be Held December 13, 2022

UNESCO; First Global Forum on Ethics of AI held in Prague, one year after the adoption of UNESCO’s global recommendation

The Global Forum on the Ethics of AI, hosted by the Czech Republic on 13 December 2022 in Prague, is the first international ministerial meeting to take place after the adoption of the global recommendation on the ethics of AI a year ago. The forum will place a spotlight on “ensuring inclusion in the AI world,” and take stock of the implementation of the recommendation so far. The event is held under UNESCO’s patronage.

"Human Rights At Risk

While artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing our lives, its benefits are not being distributed equitably across and within countries. Moreover, the technology continues to be developed in ways that raise risks related to human rights. They may also increase inequalities. While most countries are willing to take steps to minimize the risks associated with AI, many lack the regulatory capacity to do so. UNESCO seeks to bridge this gap by promoting a global and ethical approach to AI and offering guidance on regulatory measures and policies. The Recommendation is the first-ever global normative instrument in this domain, unanimously adopted 193 Member States of UNESCO."

An Open Source License That Requires Users to Do No Harm; Wired, October 4, 2019

Klint Finley, Wired;

An Open Source License That Requires Users to Do No Harm

Open source software can generally be freely copied and reused. One developer wants to impose ethical constraints on the practice.

"Increasingly, some developers are calling on their employers and the government to stop using their work in ways they believe are unethical...

Coraline Ada Ehmke wants to give her fellow developers more control over how their software is used. Software released under her new "Hippocratic License" can be shared and modified for almost any purpose, with one big exception: "Individuals, corporations, governments, or other groups for systems or activities that actively and knowingly endanger, harm, or otherwise threaten the physical, mental, economic, or general well-being of individuals or groups in violation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

Defining what it means to do harm is inherently contentious, but Ehmke hopes that tying the license to existing international standards will reduce the uncertainty. The declaration of human rights "is a document that's 70 years old and is pretty well established and accepted for its definition of harm and what violating human rights really means," she says."

Trump’s bizarre statement on China dishonors us all; The Washington Post, January 11, 2019

Dana Milbank, The Washington Post; Trump’s bizarre statement on China dishonors us all

"Asked an unrelated question on the White House South Lawn on Thursday, Trump volunteered a comparison between Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) — and the leaders of the People’s Republic of China.

“I find China, frankly, in many ways, to be far more honorable than Cryin’ Chuck and Nancy. I really do,” he said. “I think that China is actually much easier to deal with than the opposition party.”

China, honorable?

China, which is holding a million members of religious minorities in concentration camps for “reeducation” by force?

China, which, according to Trump’s own FBI director, is, by far, the leading perpetrator of technology theft and espionage against the United States and is “using illegal methods” to “replace the U.S. as the world’s leading superpower”?

China, whose state-sponsored hackers were indicted just three weeks ago and accused of a 12-year campaign of cyberattacks on this and other countries?

China, whose ruling Communist Party has caused the extermination of tens of millions of people since the end of World War II, through government-induced famine, the ideological purges of the Cultural Revolution, and in mowing down reformers in Tiananmen Square?

Trump has a strange sense of honor. In April, he bestowed the same adjective on the world’s most oppressive leader, North Korea’s nuclear-armed dictator: “Kim Jong Un, he really has been very open and I think very honorable from everything we’re seeing.”

Now, the president is declaring that China’s dictatorship, by far the world’s biggest international criminal and abuser of human rights and operator of its most extensive police state, is more honorable than his political opponents in the United States.

In Trump’s view, your opponents are your enemies — and your actual enemies are your friends. How can you negotiate with a man who thinks like this?"

TalkTalk threatens legal action over Mandelson's filesharing plan; Guardian, 10/29/09

Mark Sweney, Guardian; TalkTalk threatens legal action over Mandelson's filesharing plan:

Carphone Warehouse-owned internet service provider attacks plans to cut off connections of persistent filesharers

"TalkTalk, the second largest internet service provider in the UK, has threatened to launch legal action if business secretary Peter Mandelson follows through with his plan to cut off persistent illegal filesharers' internet connections.

Carphone Warehouse-owned TalkTalk, which has more than 4 million ISP customers and owns the Tiscali and AOL brands, claimed the government's plan was based on filesharers being "guilty until proven innocent" and constituted an infringement of human rights.

"The approach is based on the principle of 'guilty until proven innocent' and substitutes proper judicial process for a kangaroo court," said Andrew Heaney, the executive director of strategy and regulation at TalkTalk. "We know this approach will lead to wrongful accusations."

The government plans to look at increased action against illegal downloaders, including potentially suspending the accounts of persistent offenders, from July 2011 if a 70% reduction in online piracy is not achieved by sending warning letters. Customers will have the right to appeal if they are targeted and their connection subjected to technical measures.

"If the government moves to stage two, we would consider that extra-judicial technical measures, and would look to appeal the decision [to the courts] because it infringes human rights," Heaney said. "TalkTalk will continue to resist any attempts to make it impose technical measures on its customers unless directed to do so by a court or recognised tribunal."

BT, the largest ISP in the UK, said it "remains concerned" about some of the government's proposals and is "interested to hear whether or not customers will have some form of fair legal hearing before their broadband supplier is required to take any action against them"."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/29/talktalk-threatens-legal-action-mandelson

Potential of US Copyright Agenda to Endanger Freedom of Expression in China; IP Osgoode, 4/17/09

Julian Ho via IP Osgoode; Potential of US Copyright Agenda to Endanger Freedom of Expression in China:

"One of the most prevalent criticisms leveled against China today is the lack of human rights afforded to its citizens. This is particularly so in the area of civil and political rights, where China’s single-party unitary rule has made political prisoners of pro-democracy activists. Western advocacy groups have applied political pressure to convince the Chinese government to reduce its constraints on the human right of freedom of expression. At the same time, however, the American government has also worked hard through WTO means to toughen China’s intellectual property laws. Is this a conflicting position to take as it pertains to tougher copyright laws? Given the background of copyright law in China, it may very well be."

http://www.iposgoode.ca/2009/04/potential-of-us-copyright-agenda-to-endanger/