Difference between revisions of "Law Enforcement"
m |
m |
||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
<youtube>p-82YeUPQh0</youtube> | <youtube>p-82YeUPQh0</youtube> | ||
<b>The danger of predictive algorithms in criminal justice | Hany Farid | TEDxAmoskeagMillyard | <b>The danger of predictive algorithms in criminal justice | Hany Farid | TEDxAmoskeagMillyard | ||
− | </b><br>Predictive algorithms may help us shop, discover new music or literature, but do they belong in the courthouse? Dartmouth professor Dr. Hany Farid reverse engineers the inherent dangers and potential biases of recommendations engines built to mete out justice in today's criminal justice system. The co-founder and CTO of Fourandsix Technologies, an image authentication and forensics company, Hany Farid works to advance the field of digital forensics. Hany said, “For the past decade I have been working on technology and policy that will find a balance between an open and free Internet while reining in online abuses. With approximately a billion [[Meta|Facebook]] uploads per day and 400 hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute, this task is technically and logistically complicated but also, I believe, critical to the long-term health of our online communities.” Hany is the Albert Bradley 1915 Third Century Professor and Chair of Computer Science at Dartmouth. He is also a Senior Adviser to the Counter Extremism Project. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx | + | </b><br>Predictive algorithms may help us shop, discover new music or literature, but do they belong in the courthouse? Dartmouth professor Dr. Hany Farid reverse engineers the inherent dangers and potential biases of recommendations engines built to mete out justice in today's criminal justice system. The co-founder and CTO of Fourandsix Technologies, an image authentication and forensics company, Hany Farid works to advance the field of digital forensics. Hany said, “For the past decade I have been working on technology and [[policy]] that will find a balance between an open and free Internet while reining in online abuses. With approximately a billion [[Meta|Facebook]] uploads per day and 400 hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute, this task is technically and logistically complicated but also, I believe, critical to the long-term health of our online communities.” Hany is the Albert Bradley 1915 Third Century Professor and Chair of Computer Science at Dartmouth. He is also a Senior Adviser to the Counter Extremism Project. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx |
|} | |} | ||
|<!-- M --> | |<!-- M --> | ||
Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
<b>CPDP 2020: Regulating Artificial Intelligence in Criminal Justice? | <b>CPDP 2020: Regulating Artificial Intelligence in Criminal Justice? | ||
</b><br>MODERATOR: Juraj Sajfert | </b><br>MODERATOR: Juraj Sajfert | ||
− | SPEAKERS: Katalin Ligeti, University of Luxembourg (LU); Anna Moscibroda, DG JUST (EU); Lani Cossette, Microsoft (BE); Frank Schuermans, Supervisory Body for Police Information (BE) Panel Description AI can make predictions about where, when, and by whom crimes are likely to be committed. AI can also estimate how likely it is that a suspect, defendant or convict flees or commits further crimes. Against the backdrop that AI helps predictive policing and predictive justice, what should the EU’s legal and policy responses be, in particular after the adoption of the Artificial Intelligence Ethics Guidelines? One approach is to count on the vitality of recently adopted data protection laws -in particular, Law Enforcement Directive (EU) 2016/680. Another approach would be to launch a regulatory reform process, either in or out of the classical data protection realm. This panel will look at the usefulness and reliability of AI for criminal justice and will critically asses the different regulatory avenues the new European Commission might consider. - How does the idea of “trustworthy AI” translate into the area of criminal law? - Should we not ban the use of predictive policing systems or the use of AI in criminal law cases, on the basis of ethics? - Does the new European Commission plan to propose legislation in this area? If yes, what would be the objectives of such new laws? Should the actors leading such a reform be different from the ones that were leading the EU data protection reform? - Is it possible to develop predictive justice and predictive policing, and still respect the requirements of the GDPR and Directive (EU) 2016/680? | + | SPEAKERS: Katalin Ligeti, University of Luxembourg (LU); Anna Moscibroda, DG JUST (EU); Lani Cossette, Microsoft (BE); Frank Schuermans, Supervisory Body for Police Information (BE) Panel Description AI can make predictions about where, when, and by whom crimes are likely to be committed. AI can also estimate how likely it is that a suspect, defendant or convict flees or commits further crimes. Against the backdrop that AI helps predictive policing and predictive justice, what should the EU’s legal and [[policy]] responses be, in particular after the adoption of the Artificial Intelligence Ethics Guidelines? One approach is to count on the vitality of recently adopted data protection laws -in particular, Law Enforcement Directive (EU) 2016/680. Another approach would be to launch a regulatory reform process, either in or out of the classical data protection realm. This panel will look at the usefulness and reliability of AI for criminal justice and will critically asses the different regulatory avenues the new European Commission might consider. - How does the idea of “trustworthy AI” translate into the area of criminal law? - Should we not ban the use of predictive policing systems or the use of AI in criminal law cases, on the basis of ethics? - Does the new European Commission plan to propose legislation in this area? If yes, what would be the objectives of such new laws? Should the actors leading such a reform be different from the ones that were leading the EU data protection reform? - Is it possible to develop predictive justice and predictive policing, and still respect the requirements of the GDPR and Directive (EU) 2016/680? |
|} | |} | ||
|<!-- M --> | |<!-- M --> |
Revision as of 15:44, 16 April 2023
Youtube search... ...Google search
- Case Studies
- Screening; Passenger, Luggage, & Cargo
- Man defends against package thieves using machine learning AI, flour, and very loud sirens | Jorge Jimenez - PC Gamer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|