On the efficiency of ethics as a governing tool for artificial intelligence

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-6746.2022.1.42584

Keywords:

AI Ethics, Ethical Guidelines, Governance, Bioethics, Regulation

Abstract

The 4th Industrial Revolution is the culmination of the digital age. Nowadays, technologies such as robotics, nanotechnology, genetics, and artificial intelligence promise to transform our world and the way we live. The field of Artificial Intelligence Safety and Ethics are emerging research areas that have been gaining popularity in recent years. Several private, public and non-governmental organizations have published guidelines proposing ethical principles for regulating the use and development of autonomous intelligent systems. Meta-analyses of the AI Ethics research field point to convergence on certain ethical principles that supposedly govern the AI industry. However, little is known about the effectiveness of this form of “Ethics.” In this paper, we would like to conduct a critical analysis of the current state of AI Ethics and suggest that this form of governance based on principled ethical guidelines is not sufficient to norm the AI industry and its developers. We believe that drastic changes are necessary, both in the training processes of professionals in the fields related to the development of software and intelligent systems and in the increased regulation of these professionals and their industry. To this end, we suggest that law should benefit from recent contributions from bioethics, to make the contributions of AI ethics to governance explicit in legal terms.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Nicholas Kluge Corrêa, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

Doutorando em Filosofia no PPGF da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), em Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

Nythamar Fernandes de Oliveira, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

Doutor e professor no PPG em Filosofia da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), em Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

Diogo Fernando Massmann, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

Mestre em Filosofia e Ciências Cognitivas pela Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), em Marília, SP, Brasil. Doutorando em Filosofia pelo PPGF da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), em Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.

References

BEVIR, M. Governance: A Very Short Introduction. UK, Oxford: OUP Oxford, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199606412.001.0001

BODDINGTON, P. Towards a code of ethics for artificial intelligence. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60648-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60648-4

BODENHEIMER, T.; JONSEN, A. A Short History of Medical Ethics. Journal of Public Health Policy, Basingstoke, UK, v. 22, n. 2, p. 247-249, 2001. https://doi.org/10.2307/3343467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3343467

BRIEF, A. P.; DUKERICH, J. M.; BROWN, P. R.; BRETT, J. F. What’s wrong with the treadway commission report? Experimental analyses of the effects of personal values and codes of conduct on fraudulent financial reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, Charlottesville, Virginia, v. 15, n. 2, p. 183-198, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705586

BYNUM, T. Flourishing ethics. Ethics Inf. Technol, [S. I.], v. 8, n. 4, p. 157-173, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-9107-1

CALO, R. Artificial intelligence policy: a primer and roadmap. SSRN Journal, [S. I.], v. 51, p. 399-435, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3015350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3015350

CLEEK, M. A.; Leonard, S. L. Can corporate codes of ethics influence behavior? Journal of Business Ethics, [S. l.], v. 17, n. 6, p. 619-630, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017969921581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017969921581

CORRÊA, N. K.; DE OLIVEIRA, N. F. Good AI for the Present of Humanity Democratizing AI Governance. AI Ethics Journal, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 2, p. 1-16, 2021. https://doi.org/10.47289/AIEJ20210716-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47289/AIEJ20210716-2

DANIELS, N. Just Health Care. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624971

DAVIS, J.; NATHAN, L.P. Value sensitive design: applications, adaptations, and critiques. In: VAN DEN HOVEN, J.; VERMAAS, P. E.; VAN DE POEL, I. (ed.). Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015. p. 1-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6970-0_3

FLORIDI, L.; COWLS, J.; BELTRAMETTI, M. et al. AI4People – An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations. Minds & Machines, Dordrecht, NE, v. 28, p. 689-707, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5

FRAZÃO, A.; MULHOLLAND, C. (org.). Inteligência Artificial e Direito. 2. ed. São Paulo: Thomson Reuters Brasil, 2020.

FREITAS, J.; FREITAS, T. Direito e inteligência artificial: Em defesa do humano. Belo Horizonte: Editora Fórum, 2020.

FRIEDMAN, B.; KAHN, P.H.; BORNING, A.; HULDTGREN, A. Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Early engagement and new technologies: opening up the laboratory. Berlin: Springer, 2013. p. 55–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4

GLANNON, W. Neuroethics. Bioethics, Oxford, UK, v. 20, n. 1, p. 37-52, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00474.x

GOERTZEL, K. M. Legal liability for bad software. CrossTalk, Force Base, Utah v. 29, n. 5, p. 23-28, 2016.

GOLDSMITH, J.; Burton A, E. Why teaching ethics to AI practitioners is important. In: AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 31., 2017. Proceedings […]. [S. l.]: AAAI-17, 2017. p. 4863-4840, 2017. Disponível em: https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI17/paper/view/14271/13992. Acesso em: 9 jan. 2022.

GREENE, D.; HOFMANR, A. L.; STARK, L. Better, nicer, clearer, fairer: A critical assessment of the movement for ethical artifcial intelligence and machine learning. In: HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEM SCIENCES, 52., 2019. Proceedings […]. [S. l.]: HICCL, 2019. p. 2122-2131. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.258

HAGENDORFF, T. The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines. Minds and Machines, Dordrecht, NE, v. 30, p. 99-120, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09526-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8

JOBIN, A.; IENCA, M.; VAYENA, E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nat Mach Intell, [S. I.], n. 1, p. 389-399, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

LERE, J. C.; GAUMNITZ, B.R. The Impact of Codes of Ethics on Decision Making: Some Insights from Information Economics. Journal of Business Ethics, [S. I.], n. 48, p. 365-379, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000005747.37500.c8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000005747.37500.c8

MCNAMARA, A.; SMITH, J.; MURPHY-HILL, E. Does ACM’s code of ethics change ethical decision making in software development? In: ESEC/FSE 2018: ACM JOINT MEETING ON EUROPEAN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING CONFERENCE AND SYMPOSIUM ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 26., 2018. Proceedings […]. [S. l.], ESEC/FSE, 2018. p. 729-733. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236024.3264833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3236024.3264833

MITTELSTADT, B. Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nat Mach Intell, [S. I.], n. 1, p. 501-507, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4

MORLEY, J.; et al. From what to how: an initial review of publicly available AI ethics tools, methods and research to translate principles into practices. In: ArXiv. [S. l.], 2019. Disponível em: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04741. Acesso em: 9 jan. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3830348

OSBORN, M.; DAY, R.; KOMESAROFF, P.; MANT, A. Do ethical Guidelines make a difference to decision-making? Internal medicine journal, [S. I.], v. 39, n. 12, p. 800-805, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.01954.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.01954.x

RESSÉGUIER, A.; RODRIGUES, R. AI ethics should not remain toothless! A call to bring back the teeth of ethics. Big Data & Society, Waterford, Ireland, v. 7, n. 2, p. 1-5, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720942541. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720942541

ROSKIES, A. Neuroethics. In: ZALTA, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [S. l.], 2021. (Spring 2021 Edition) Disponível em: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/neuroethics. Acesso em: 9 Jan 2022

RUSSELL, Stuart J.; NORVIG, Peter. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. 4. ed. London: Pearson, 2022.

RUSSELL, S.; DEWEY, D.; TEGMARK, M. An Open Letter: Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence. Open Letter. Signed by 8,600 people. In: Future Online. [S. l.], 2015. Disponível em: https://futureoflife.org/data/documents/research_priorities.pdf. Acesso em: 9 jan. 2022.

SANTIAGO, N. SHERPA Delphi Study – Round 1 Results [Project Deliverable]. SHERPA project, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.project-sherpa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/sherpa-delphi-study-round-1-summary-17.03.2020.docx.pdf. Acesso em: 9 jan. 2022.

SCULLEY, D. et al. Hidden technical debt in machine learning systems. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst, [S. I.], n. 2, p. 2503-2511, 2015.

SEARLE, J. R. Minds, brains, and programs. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, [S. I.], n. 3, p. 417-457, 1980. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756

SMITH, M. The Moral Problem. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

UNESCO. Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. 41st session of the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Paris, from 9 to 24 November, 2021. Disponível em: https://en.unesco.org/artificial-intelligence/ethics. Acesso em: 9 Jan 2022

IVAKKURI, V.; KEMELL, K. K.; JANTUNEN, M.; ABRAHAMSSON, P. “This is Just a Prototype”: How Ethics Are Ignored in Software Startup-Like Environments. In: STRAY, V.; HODA, R.; PAASIVAARA, M.; KRUCHTEN, P. (ed.). Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming. XP 2020. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, [S. I.], v. 383, p. 195-210, Springer: Cham, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49392-9_13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49392-9_13

ZOLLERS, F. E.; MCMULLIN, A.; HURD, S. N.; SHEARS, P. No More Soft Landings for Software: Liability for Defects in an Industry That Has Come of Age. Santa Clara High Tech. L. J., [S. l.], v. 21, p. 745-782, 2005. Disponível em: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol21/iss4/4. Acesso em: 9 jan. 2022.

Downloads

Published

2022-08-11

How to Cite

Corrêa, N. K., Oliveira, N. F. de, & Massmann, D. F. (2022). On the efficiency of ethics as a governing tool for artificial intelligence. Veritas (Porto Alegre), 67(1), e42584. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-6746.2022.1.42584

Issue

Vol. 67 No. 1 (2022): Single Volume

Section

Ethics and Political Philosophy

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Veritas (Porto Alegre)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright

The submission of originals to Revista Veritas implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite Revista Veritas as the site of original publication.


Creative Commons License

Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited. Copyright: © 2006-2020 EDIPUCRS</p