Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (Overview Study)

Introduction

The basic methodological prerequisite for processing this overview study was the preparation of keywords needed for online searching, on the basis of which I sorted websites, pdf documents, articles, presentations and profiles. In my case, these were the words artificial intelligence and ethics in Slovak and English. Based on such prepared and collected information, I then sorted them according to the categories science, research, politics, private sector. Subsequently, I analyzed reports, online articles, monographs, profile and web pages, while sorting the documents into those that form the basis of the entire study, those that are supplementary, and those that are peripheral. In addition to analysis, I used synthesis, through which I wanted to connect the individual parts, information by means of references to individual documents, which among other things provide further information either about a selected author, their publications, activities, or about organizations, their activities, or companies and their activities, or members of these companies and their scientific, developmental practice and work. This study is part of the preparation of a more extensive research project on the topic of the ethics of artificial intelligence.

Ethics of Artificial Intelligence - an overview of the state of affairs in the world

In June 2019, a preliminary summary report was created, (which was later published as a separate monograph) under the title Artificial Intelligence Governance and Ethics: Global Perspectives by authors Angela Daly, Thilo Hagendorff, Li Hui, Monique Mann, Vidushi Marda, Ben Wagner, Wei Wang and Saskia Witteborn, which on 34 pages discusses the need to implement ethics and ethical standards into the global artificial intelligence system, whether in the state or private sector. The individual authors address different perspectives on the topic of artificial intelligence. From a global point of view, we can say that there is a clear effort to introduce ethical standards into the use of artificial intelligence within private companies, political and civic spheres. The problem, as it turns out, is the inconsistency of these standards, but there is also a lack of societal discourse, especially in countries such as China and Hong Kong. Naturally, the social system in the given countries plays a role here, which may be an obstacle within a global agreement. Another problem is the speed of development in the field of artificial intelligence and the slow response of political and academic discourse in this area. Naturally, the private sector is the fastest, which may be a problem in terms of the already mentioned values of transparency, fairness, privacy, accountability, reliability and environmental sustainability in the absence of ethical rules for their use or their vagueness. Of course, the leaders in the development of artificial intelligence are so far the USA, which also has very strongly anchored ethical standards on the protection of privacy, civil liberties and American values, but toward the American people, which no longer provide absolute civil protection for all beings on planet Earth. It is also not clear to what extent the implementation of these ethical standards into practice has progressed and whether a change has occurred. Public discussion was encouraged by the Australian government, which developed an ethical framework that should include a set of strategies and procedures for introducing ethical principles into practice at a high level. These are principles of impact assessment; internal / external review; risk assessment; guidelines on best practices; industry standards; cooperation; monitoring and improvement mechanisms; appeal mechanisms and; Australia's ethical framework and the related “toolkit”. Despite the above, the authors state that, in terms of developing ethical standards, the European Union and China are the most advanced, although the USA is also trying to catch up in this field. India appears to be the most problematic, as it does not yet have a developed ethical plan. In terms of competitiveness, the USA and China are currently in the lead. In the EU, the problem of competition in ethical standards becomes visible especially with the departure of Great Britain, which sets the priority of becoming a leader in ethical AI. The authors point out the overbreadth of ethical standards, which do provide guidance on how to behave when working on AI, but the problem is how to act in the development of new AI technologies if development goes beyond or outside the given ethical standards provided. Another problem is legal enforceability, which nowhere has yet reached the form of law. The most advanced in this respect are the USA, although even there it is not a law. From this point of view, a truly serious problem arises of a kind of “ethical handwashing,” which, given the constant progress in this area, is not desirable. Another problem the authors point out is AI research itself, when researchers, in the case of new developments that may not be standard, i.e. do not correspond to the ethical standards of the given country, may shift development together with scientific capacities to another country that is less ethical in this respect. Such shifts can lead to serious not only security threats. (more can be read at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf ) Within the EU, the White Paper on Artificial Intelligence - a European approach to excellence and trust. (February 2020) is being created, to which SlovakAI, among others, will also provide its opinion, and which deals with ethics, law and principles for the emergence of trustworthy ethical artificial intelligence. (available at: https://op.europa.eu/sk/publication-detail/-/publication/aace9398-594d-11ea-8b81-01aa75ed71a1/language-sk/format-PDF)

Within this overview study, I would like to focus attention on the authors of the mentioned summary report and present their profile as well as publication activities.

Angela Daly deals with the socio-legal aspect of artificial intelligence. She is the author of works such as: Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D Printing Revolution (Palgrave 2016) Private Power, Online Information Flows and EU Law: Mind the Gap (Hart 2016)) (available online at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf)

In the work Socio-Legal Aspect of the 3D Printing Revolution, the author Angela Daly deals with the legal aspect of implementing 3D printers into common practice. In the work, she examines the trajectory of 3D printing in practice and its interaction with various areas of law, including intellectual property, product liability, weapons law, data privacy and fundamental / constitutional rights. She also pays special attention to the connection between 3D printing and the internet. This is the first expert legal analysis of 3D printers from a legal point of view.

In her second publication Private Power, Online Information Flows and EU Law: Mind the Gap (2016), she writes about the problem of private dissemination of information in the EU by powerful private economic forces. These economic forces prevent the free spread of information, thereby hindering the free market and disadvantaging the autonomy of internet users themselves. In the work she points to a legal gap between strong economic forces within competition law.

Thilo Hagendorff (Germany) has been a research associate at the International Center for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities (IZEW) at the University of Tübingen since 2013. He is a media and technology ethicist. He deals with machine learning and artificial intelligence, digitalization, virtual reality, social media, monitoring, personal data protection, media, technological and information ethics. He is the author of three monographs and a number of studies and individual contributions. He is the author of three monographs. (available at: https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/facilities/central-institutions/international-center-for-ethics-in-the-sciences-and-humanities/team/dr-thilo-hagendorff/)

Monique Mann (Australia) focuses on transnational crime, police technologies, surveillance and transnational online policing. She is a member of the board of the Australian Privacy Foundation. (available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf) She is the author of Politicising and Policing Organised Crime (Routledge 2019), in which she deals with the problem of organized crime, among other things, also through the use of the internet or artificial intelligence. (basic information available at: https://www.routledge.com/Politicising-and-Policing-Organised-Crime-1st-Edition/Mann/p/book/9781138067332) At the same time, she is a co-author of the publication Biometrics, Crime and Security (Routledge 2018), where the main motif is the relationship between biometric data - DNA identification, fingerprints, facial scanning as a tool for early detection of criminal activity versus human and individual rights. She examines the development of these technologies in the states of Europe, the USA, Great Britain and Australia, focusing especially on their jurisdiction.

Vidushi Marda (India) is a lawyer who deals with research on artificial intelligence and human rights. She is currently dealing with the impact of machine learning systems on the exercise of rights in Asia. The mentioned author influenced the Supreme Court of India with her studies, which ruled on the right to privacy in 2017. She is the author and co-author of scholarly works such as: Marda, V. Artificial Intelligence Policy in India: A framework for engaging the limits of data-driven decision making, or Lockwood, G., & Marda, V. Harassment in the Workplace : The Legal Context, “JURISPRUDENCE”, The International Association of Law and Politics. The author is a non-resident analyst of AI and law at Carnegie India. (Available at: http://vidushimarda.com/writing/)

Ben Wagner works at Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) in Berlin. His research focuses on technology, human rights and responsible information systems. In 2014-2016 he was the founder and director of the Center for Internet and Human Rights at the European University Viadrina. He deals with ethics and algorithms - he is an algoethicist. As part of his professional work, he is part of the “Ethics of Algorithms” project developed by Bertelsmann Stiftung (available at: https://ethicsofalgorithms.org/project/). The aim of this project is to increase awareness of the possibilities and risks of using algorithms in everyday practice. The use of algorithms precisely requires ethical rules so that they are used for the benefit of humanity. The project is team-based, where individual workers on the company website present their outputs in short reports. To deepen knowledge in the field, they often offer entire documents in pdf format in English and German. Such a document is How algorithmic processes impact opportunities to be part of society Discussion paper Ethics of Algorithms #2 available in pdf format (https://ethicsofalgorithms.org/2017/06/02/calculating-participation-how-algorithmic) by the authors Kilian Vieth and Ben Wagner. The basic idea of the mentioned document is the possibilities of algorithms, which are already part of our lives. They point out that algorithms are part of power in digital society and become a tool of power. In the document they explain the basic concepts, a general overview of algorithmic processes (Algorithm desicion making - ADM), define the relevant area in the analysis of ADM processes and present typical scenarios and functions related to their use. At the same time, they point to the problem of the social autonomous identity of employees, whom the algorithm system can move according to market needs on the basis of a work platform, while the autonomous self-determination of employees has only weak validity. It is precisely this moment of the human need for autonomous personal decision-making in the social (work) sphere that may point to the inadequacy of ADM. On the other hand, in the field of police evaluation systems, it appears that algorithms for recognizing so-called hotspots - i.e. places with higher criminal activity - have proven effective and are used in large cities in Europe and elsewhere. At the same time, the COMPAS system is known, where algorithmic decision-making is applied in predicting recidivism among offenders. This system was developed to predict human behavior and classify people. So we can see the broad application of algorithmic decision-making in practice, which, however, brings with it many ethical questions, as the authors of this document Kilian Vieth and Ben Wagner point out.

The authors Carla Hustedt and Lajla Fetic worked on a working document of Bertelsmann Stiftung, which is discussed in more detail in the discussion paper titled From principles to practice: How can we make AI ethics measurable? where the problem of introducing artificial intelligence and its ethical rules is addressed. As the authors state, they are trying to bridge the barrier between the private, political, civic and scientific sectors with a working document that would provide ethical rules for introducing AI (artificial intelligence) into practice. As the authors continue on the website, it is mainly about preserving the values of privacy, fairness and transparency. On this website we also read in the same discussion that in 2019 Bertelsmann Stiftung issued its set of Algo.Rules. It is a set of nine principles for the ethical development and use of algorithmic systems. Currently, the authors note, they face the challenge of implementing these rules in practice. They see the problem in implementing ethical algorithms in the fact that there is no exact definition of values such as fairness, transparency and privacy, which makes it difficult to create solid algorithms that would be measurable and controllable. The authors of this document propose an ethical label for AI systems similar to that used for electrical appliances, where we are informed about their standard, which can be measured. After thorough analysis, the working document proposes selecting 6 key values, namely transparency, privacy, accountability, fairness, reliability and environmental sustainability. Individual AI products would receive a rating label (similar to that for white goods, or tires - note by the author). The authors also point to the need for system standards as well as process standards, which would show important information both for companies and for target users and regulate the relationship between them. They also point to the diversity of the range of operation of individual matrices, because they will be assessed differently in industry than, for example, in medicine, etc. They note that it should be a three-dimensional algorithm that would evaluate a more multidimensional ethical scale. They further propose establishing a 5-level scale of AI usage risk according to risk from 0 (no risk) to 4, where the artificial intelligence system should not actually be used. (available at: https://ethicsofalgorithms.org/category/publications/)

Another figure in the field of AI is Saskia Witteborn, who specializes in transnational migration and technology. The author has expertise in forced migration, mobility and space, digital heterotopia, emotions and assemblage processes. She is the author of numerous articles and chapters, for example Digital Power in Forced Migration: Imagined Affordances and Gendered Practices, published in the journal Popular Communication. (available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Saskia_Witteborn)

Wei Wang is currently a member of the International Association of Artificial Intelligence and Law, the Asian network of personal data protection experts and the global network of Creative Commons Global Network. (available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf)

Li Hui is an associate researcher at the Shanghai Institute for the Science of Science. He focuses on new media and scientific communication, scientific and technological revolutions and industrial transformations, and on the social impact and governance of artificial intelligence (AI). (available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf) He is the author of several publications, such as Study of New Industrial Technology for 2011 - intelligent robot 1, which is a book-form research report on industrial maps and innovation such as industrial robots (further information available at: http://eng.siss.sh.cn/expert/learnteam/553714.shtml)

Another preliminary report, published in 2019 in Switzerland by the author trio Jobin, A., Ienca, M., Vayena, E under the title Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines. This preliminary report was, after completion, published under the title “The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines”: (https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-019-0088-2 ). and strongly encourages a unified ethical platform at every level. Not only the private sector and government sectors, but also at the level of the European Union, reflect this need, and therefore the effort is growing, as stated in the mentioned report, for the competent bodies to deal with the problem of the ethics of artificial intelligence on the basis of its unification and a unified procedure for working with artificial intelligence binding for all sectors. This concerns the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence appointed by the European Commission, the expert group on artificial intelligence within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), further the advisory board for the ethical use of artificial intelligence and data in Singapore, and the select committee on artificial intelligence of the House of Lords of the United Kingdom (UK). Within their institutional functions, these committees have developed or are supposedly preparing reports and guidelines related to AI, as can be read on the document pages. The very aim of the authors was to answer emerging questions. For this reason, the authors carried out a review of the scope of existing guidelines on ethical artificial intelligence (AI). The aim of the analysis was to map the global landscape of existing principles and guidelines for ethical AI, and thus also to determine whether a global convergence is emerging with regard to ethical AI principles. As the authors point out, the USA and the United Kingdom deal with ethical guidelines the most, followed by Japan, Germany, France and Finland. So we can see that these are economically stronger states. (https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1906/1906.11668.pdf) Although no unified platform was found in the analyzed documents, it is possible to say that the main attention is attracted by the following values: transparency, fairness and equity, non-maleficence, accountability and privacy. The authors of this work raise an interesting question of responsibility. The issue is whether artificial intelligence should be responsible to humans as humans are, or whether this responsibility should be transferred exclusively to humans as those responsible for technical artefacts. If we take into account a certain degree of consciousness in artificial intelligence, this question becomes significantly current and necessary to unify, whether ethically, legally or politically. (https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1906/1906.11668.pdf). As we can notice, values of privacy, fairness and transparency are also mentioned by authors Carla Hustedt and Lajla Fetic.

Within this overview study, we will take a closer look at the authors of the study I mentioned above (Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines).

Anna Jobin currently works in the Health Ethics and Policy Lab at ETH Zurich, which is affiliated with the Digital Humanities and Cultures Lab and the Lab for Science and Technology Studies at the University of Lausanne. Her current research projects are located at the intersection of science, technology and society, with a particular focus on ethics in research and citizen science, interaction with algorithmic systems and ethical artificial intelligence ( https://sociostrategy.com/about-anna-jobin/) She is the author of numerous contributions and chapters. For example La mémoire kaléidoscopique: l'histoire au prisme des algorithmes or Les services numériques grand public et leurs utilisateurs: trois acquches sociotechniques contemporaines. A contrario. ( https://sociostrategy.com/about-anna-jobin/)

Marcello Ienca also works in the Health Ethics and Policy Lab at ETH Zurich. His research focuses on ethics and governance of biomedical data as well as ethically aligned artificial intelligence and responsible innovation for emerging technologies at the human-machine interface. He also collaborates with Anna Jobin as an author. The author published a separate monograph entitled Intelligenza2: Per un'unione di intelligenza naturale e artificiale. and publishes in scholarly journals such as Neuron, Nature biotechnologie, American Journal of Bioethics. (https://bioethics.ethz.ch/the-group/people/person-detail.marcello-ienca.html)

Mark van Rijmenam is a well-known international speaker in the field of work and the future labor market. At the same time, he is a recognized member of professional speakers in the Netherlands and also a member of the Global Speakers Federation. He is the founder of Datafloq.com, a platform for content on new technologies. He is the author of several publications.( https://vanrijmenam.nl/) His latest is the publication Organization of Tomorrow - The organization of tomorrow (2020), in which he discusses issues of introducing artificial intelligence into business, and also deals with how new technologies will affect organizations and many other questions he tries to answer. .( https://vanrijmenam.nl/)

Within this overview study I would also like to deal with the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence (Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence), which brings together experts from various fields of science and academia in Japan, and also publishes its own journal, where one can see thematic areas and the names of authors who focus on various areas of research from bioethics ( Ichigaku Takigava) to researchers from the information field such as Katsumi Inoe. It is an academic society with leading researchers and engineers. The main activity of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence is to organize an annual conference once a year (in 2020 it will be its 34th), where research is presented and invited lectures are held. (current conference https://www.ai-gakkai.or.jp/en/) . Furthermore, symposia are held once a year, from which the best lectures are published as companion talks. Another activity of the society is the publication of the journal mentioned above, whose task is to mediate information on current topics related to artificial intelligence. The journal is published 6 times a year. Seminars on the topic of artificial intelligence and exchange of information from research in this field are also offered. The society itself has declared ethical rules, through an ethics committee established in 2014, which can be viewed on the internet network (http://ai-elsi.org/archives/514)

As a second organization I would present OpenAI, which is better known than the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence. OpenAI was founded in 2015. Its founders include Elon Musk, Ilya Sutskever, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Wojciech Zaremba and John Schulman. It is headquartered in the USA. Elon Musk needs no introduction; more interesting for the purposes of this study are Ilya Sutskever, who works in the fields of mathematics and computer science. He publishes in the field of neural networks. (information available at: https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~ilya/pubs/). He also works in the field of deep learning, where the computer recognizes patterns in the data themselves, i.e. it tries to understand our view of the world. This technology is used in translators from foreign languages into native languages. In Slovakia, neural networks are studied by M. Čerňanský. (2009). Another member of OpenAI is Wojciech Zaremba, who studied at New York University and the University of Warsaw. Like Ilya Sutskever, he deals with deep learning, mathematics and computer science. (information about the author available at: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=XCZpOcAAAAAJ&hl=en)

John Schulman is a scientist, works at OpenAI, of which he is also a co-founder. He deals with deep learning, and has also worked in robotics. In his dissertation (2016) he dealt with expectation optimization. He currently leads a team that develops algorithms related to reinforcement learning. (information on publications available at: http://joschu.net/publications.html)

Another organization in the field of artificial intelligence is the digital rights group The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) (Electronic Frontier Foundation). It is a non-profit organization that defends civil liberties in the digital world. EFF was founded in 1990 in the USA. This organization recognizes the need to protect citizens and their rights and freedoms in relation to the use or misuse of computer technologies, artificial intelligence and its algorithms against citizens. It seeks to protect rights to privacy, online freedom of expression, or protection against unlawful surveillance. It is an organization that strives for global network connectivity, within which it has set itself the goal of protecting human and civil liberties and the rights of its users. (information available at: https://www.eff.org/about)

Conclusion

As we can see from this overview, it is only a small part of what is developing, defended, misused, but also helping to make life easier and increase our comfort in the field of artificial intelligence. Naturally, it is also a powerful weapon that provides opportunities to control others and deprive them of their freedoms, which is why it is very important not to isolate science, the public and politics as separate fields between which there is a huge gap, but to connect them and lead dialogues about cooperation for the benefit of humanity and not against it. China and the USA are currently at the forefront on the basis of research. It is possible that this is not only a research, but especially a paradigmatic struggle. As we could see, even other stronger economies do not want to lag behind. The question remains how these struggles will develop in the global world and to what extent governments and governmental groupings will be willing to connect their worldview with those of others. As can be seen, the topic of artificial intelligence is highly topical worldwide, both in academia, private, public, and political spheres. Not only in the current period has active thinking begun about the problems that progress in the field of artificial intelligence brings with it, but for several years there has already been discussion about the rules by which it is necessary to proceed so that we are not swallowed by our own genius. It is clear that progress cannot be stopped, as well as the fact that artificial intelligence is our future. It is however necessary to cooperate in all areas in order to reach unified ethical standards that could be accepted by everyone and would bring not restrictions, but conscious progress. The whole situation in the field of artificial intelligence research requires that we deal with the moral possibilities and limits of responsible use of artificial intelligence. In this area, several questions arise immediately that need to be addressed. One of them is whether we can use artificial intelligence exclusively for our own, human, purposes as a means, given that it has already been proven that artificial intelligence possesses a certain kind of consciousness. Another topic that emerges before us is whether we even have the moral right to develop such artificial intelligence that is smarter than humanity itself? Do we have the right to install ethical software into artificial intelligence that would suppress its independent decision-making and development exclusively for the benefit of humans? At the same time, as human beings, will we be safe from the sophisticated threats that artificial intelligence brings, given that it does not possess emotions and in fact only carries out commands? Are we humans even morally and responsibly prepared for the entry of such intelligent systems into our lives? To what extent can our own irresponsibility endanger us in the case of unethical conduct by people who misuse artificial intelligence for their own criminal, political, private purposes? These are also questions with which global society is dealing. However, as can be seen, consensus has not yet been reached, which of course may stem from human nature in general, but there is also the problem of cultural and social paradigms, whose ambiguity complicates work on ethical standards. Another problem hidden within research and the use of artificial intelligence is its high potential to replace a large amount of human labor. Given population growth, problems with the employment of several generations are already arising, while further loss of jobs in favor of artificial intelligence, even if more perfect, could be the cause of serious social unrest. Naturally, we cannot reject artificial intelligence as a threat, that would be too easy and not entirely a moral solution. As I already mentioned, we cannot stop the progress of humanity, nor can we stop the development of increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence; however, we can clearly set the goals of our development not only within individual societies, but globally as humanity. We can walk hand in hand with artificial intelligence, which will be our partner, not our slave, from whom we too can learn how to be human and teach it humanity. We always have more possibilities; the important thing is which of them we will be able to use. Will the laws of robotics, as formulated by A. Asimov, apply unequivocally? Should a robot or artificial intelligence, or an algorithm, really be governed by these laws?

1. “A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.” (Asimov, 2004, p. 209)

So let us insert Kant’s imperative and the robot/artificial intelligence will not be an end in itself, but only a means. Is that moral? Let us also insert the utilitarian rule of usefulness; it must always serve humans. What happens if a human programs a robot/artificial intelligence against humans. How will artificial intelligence deal with it - will it defy the command, or rather destroy itself from the standpoint of utility? Does a robot/artificial intelligence have the right to protect itself if the first two laws of robotics are to remain in force? Will we be more moral if we use artificial intelligence only and exclusively for the benefit of humanity? Intelligence that surpasses us will remain only a means for the development of humanity. The question that arises is whether that development will be more humane?

Author: PhDr. Jana Bartal, PhD. Department of General and Applied Ethics, FF UKF About the author: Jana Bartal was born in 1975 in Prešov, where she studied at the Faculty of Natural Sciences and Humanities, in the field of teacher training, specializing in ethical education - history. She completed her doctoral studies at the Department of Ethics and Catechetics, now the Department of General and Applied Ethics of the Faculty of Arts at UKF in Nitra. She defended her dissertation entitled Aggressive Behavior of Primary School Pupils as an Ethical Problem in 2008. She completed her rigorosum thesis and defense at the Department of General and Applied Ethics in 2009, under the title The Contemporary Face of the Ethics of Buddhism. She is the author of three separate monographs. She worked at the Department of General and Applied Ethics in 2007-2013, where she returned again in 2019. The author deals with values, artificial intelligence and her special profile is Eastern ethical systems.

References:

1. Asimov, A.: Rotohistorie I. Praha: Triton, 2004. ISBN80-7254-477-2
2. White Paper on Artificial Intelligence - a European approach to excellence and trust. (February 2020) pdf document available at: https://op.europa.eu/sk/publication-detail/-/publication/aace9398-594d-11ea-8b81-01aa75ed71a1/language-sk/format-PDF
3. Čapek, K. : R.U.R. Artur, 2004. 102 p. ISBN 80-86216-46-2
4. Daly A., Hagendorff T., Li Hui, Mann M., Vidushi Marda, Ben Wagner, Wei Wang and Saskia Witteborn: Artificial Intelligence Governance and Ethics: Global Perspectives available at https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1907/1907.03848.pdf
5. Daly, A. 2016 : Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D Printing Revolution. Palgrave : Mcmillan, 2016. ISBN 978-1-137-51556-8
6. Daly, A.: Private Power, Online Information Flows and EU Law: Mind the Gap, Hart Publishing, 2016, 162 p. ISBN 978- 1-50990-063-3
7. Ethical guidelines for the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence available at: http://ai-elsi.org/archives/514
8. How algorithmic processes impact opportunities to be part of society Discussion paper Ethics of Algorithms #2 available https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/facilities/central-institutions/international-center-for-ethics-in-the-sciences-and-humanities/team/dr-thilo-hagendorff/
9. Hui L., http://eng.siss.sh.cn/expert/learnteam/553714.shtml Translation at: https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=sk&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=en&sp=nmt4&u=http://eng.siss.sh.cn/publications/publications/555968.shtml&usg=ALkJrhhAZMOYU6HGnJTdSqIFMPPajmmSFw
10. Hustedt, C., Fetic L.: From principles to practice: How can we make AI ethics measurable? available: https://ethicsofalgorithms.org/category/publications/ 2. APRIL 2020
11. Ienca, M (2019).: Intelligenza2: Per un'unione di intelligenza naturale e artificiale. Rosenberg & Sellier, Tourin, Italy. More information about the author available at: https://bioethics.ethz.ch/the-group/people/person-detail.marcello-ienca.html
12. Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence available at: https://www.ai-gakkai.or.jp/en/
13. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., Vayena, E.: Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines 2019, full document available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1906/1906.11668.pdf,
14. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., Vayena, E.: The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines „Globálne prostredie etických pokynov AI“: (https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-019-0088-2 ) also available in print form: Jobin, A., M. Ienca, E. Vayena (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence (ISSN 2522-5839), 389-399, September 2, 2019. (preprint available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.11668)
15. Jobin A.: https://sociostrategy.com/about-anna-jobin/
16. Jobin. A, Prezioso S.,Glassey O., Kaplan F.: (2019) La mémoire kaléidoscopique: l'histoire au prisme des algoritmes d'autocomplétion Geschichte und Informatik - Histoire et Informatique. Zürich, Švajčiarsko ISSN 1420-5955
17. Jobin A., Bilat, L. (2016): Les services numériques grand public et leurs utilisateurs: trois acquches sociotechniques contemporaines . A contrario . Lausanne: BNS Press. 22 (1)
18. Collective of authors: Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science I. Bratislava: STU, 2009 available in pdf. at: http://www2.fiit.stuba.sk/~kvasnicka/Free%20books/Umela_inteligencia_a_kognitivna_veda_I.pdf
19. Lockwood, G., & Marda, V. Harassment in the Workplace : The Legal Context, “JURISPRUDENCE”, The International Association of Law and Politics, September 2014. ISSN 1392-6195. (information on the author and her publication activities available at: http://vidushimarda.com/writing/
20. Mann M.: Politicising and Policing Organised Crime. Routledge, 2019. 174 p. ISBN 978-1-138-067-33-2 Information about the publication available at: https://www.routledge.com/Politicising-and-Policing-Organised-Crime-1st-Edition/Mann/p/book/9781138067332
21. Marda, V. Artificial Intelligence Policy in India: A framework for engaging the limits of data-driven decision making, Philosophical Transactions A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, October 2018, DOI 10.1098/rsta.2018.0087 available at: http://vidushimarda.com/writing/
22. Rijmenam van M.: The organisation of Tomorrow. London & New York: Routletge Tylor & Francis Group, 2020. ISBN: 978-0-367-23471-3,
23. Rijmenam van M.: information available at: https://vanrijmenam.nl/
24. Smith,M., Mann, M.,Urbas, G.: Biometrics, Crime and Security . Routledge, 2018. 134p. ISBN 978-1138742802, eBook ISBN: 9781315182056
25. Schulman, J.: information about the author and his publications available at: http://joschu.net/ and http://joschu.net/publications.html
26. Sutskever I.: profile information available at: https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~ilya/pubs/
27. The Electronic Frontier Foundation information available at: https://www.eff.org/about
28. Vieth, K., Wagner, B.: How algorithmic processes impact opportunities to be part of society Discussion paper Ethics of Algorithms #2 available at: https://ethicsofalgorithms.org/2017/06/02/calculating-participation-how-algorithmic)
29. Witteborn, S. : The digital force in forced migration: Imagined affordances and gendered practices. in Popular Communication 16(1):21-31 · January 2018 ISSN1540-5702 available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Saskia_Witteborn