Every detail of Rembrandt’s artistic identity could then be captured and set the foundation for an algorithm capable of creating an unprecedented masterpiece. To achieve such technological and artistic prowess, 346 Rembrandt paintings were analysed pixel by pixel and upscaled by deep learning algorithms to create a unique database. In 2016, a Rembrandt painting, “the Next Rembrandt”, was designed by a computer and created by a 3D printer, 351 years after the painter’s death. The use of AI in culture raises interesting ethical reflections. This is why UNESCO adopted the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, the very first global standard-setting instrument on the subject. So, would you want to be judged by a robot in a court of law? Would you, even if we are not sure how it reaches its conclusions? New concerns for fairness and risk for Human Rights and other fundamental values.Surveillance practices for data gathering and privacy of court users.AI is not neutral: AI-based decisions are susceptible to inaccuracies, discriminatory outcomes, embedded or inserted bias.Lack of transparency of AI tools: AI decisions are not always intelligible to humans.AI would therefore make decisions based on informed decisions devoid of any bias and subjectivity. Some argue that AI could help create a fairer criminal judicial system, in which machines could evaluate and weigh relevant factors better than human, taking advantage of its speed and large data ingestion. This trend towards the ever-increasing use of autonomous systems has been described as the automatization of justice.
#Facts about franz schubert software
Existing software systems for judges can be complemented and enhanced through AI tools to support them in drafting new decisions. For example, they can increase the efficiency and accuracy of lawyers in both counselling and litigation, with benefits to lawyers, their clients and society as a whole.
AI could presumably evaluate cases and apply justice in a better, faster, and more efficient way than a judge.ĪI methods can potentially have a huge impact in a wide range of areas, from the legal professions and the judiciary to aiding the decision-making of legislative and administrative public bodies. The use of AI in judicial systems around the world is increasing, creating more ethical questions to explore. To not replicate stereotypical representations of women in the digital realm, UNESCO addresses gender bias in AI in the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, the very first global standard-setting instrument on the subject. Gender bias should be avoided or at the least minimized in the development of algorithms, in the large data sets used for their learning, and in AI use for decision-making.
How can we ensure more equalised and accurate results? Can we report biased search results? What would or should be the accurate representation of women in search results? Thus, a search engine can become an echo chamber that upholds biases of the real world and further entrenches these prejudices and stereotypes online. Search-engine technology is not neutral as it processes big data and prioritises results with the most clicks relying both on user preferences and location. These are examples of gender bias in artificial intelligence, originating from stereotypical representations deeply rooted in our societies.ĪI-systems deliver biased results. No men in sexualised costumes or very few. Surprisingly, if you type “school boy”, results will mostly show ordinary young school boys. How many women do you count?Īn image search for “school girl” will most probably reveal a page filled with women and girls in all sorts of sexualised costumes. Type “greatest leaders of all time” in your favourite search engine and you will probably see a list of the world’s prominent male personalities.
0 kommentar(er)
