RT @j2blather: Rights are a devastatingly bad way to protect robots https://t.co/aBfjRfNkPV Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of s…
Rights are a devastatingly bad way to protect robots https://t.co/aBfjRfNkPV Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/Ep6GZIf4ky Why Robots Never Need Rights https://t.co/VA7zzIDNyi agree with @dileeplearning but not
RT @j2bryson: Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL Bryson, Diamantis, & Grant #aiethics…
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
@kennethanderson I'm sure you've already seen my law with lawyers piece, though I guess that talked less about regulation. Would love to work with you maybe late this summer on real regulatory recommendations. https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW
Monthly Report by Essentials: Most discussed articles about #ai: Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #machinelearning #artificialintelligence #Law via @j2bryson
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
@meerihaataja @ruchowdh @NetizenFour @ShannonVallor @johnchavens @KayFButterfield @vdignum @mediamocracy @tonyjprescott @theRSAorg Yes I've been focussing on both of those, have you seen my various publications on this: https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW & https:
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/G6kxxYpzH3 #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
@aimeevanrobot You might want to have a look at my two more recent papers on robots as moral & legal agents & patients: https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW and https://t.co/kuhJOKYsNo
RT @j2bryson: @NetizenFour @ShannonVallor @johnchavens @KayFButterfield @vdignum @mediamocracy @tonyjprescott @zacharylipton this isn’t abo…
@NetizenFour @ShannonVallor @johnchavens @KayFButterfield @vdignum @mediamocracy @tonyjprescott @zacharylipton this isn’t about “solving #ai”, it’s about the role of artefacts. I dislike even the phrase “human-ai collaboration”, that already implies moral
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
RT @j2bryson: Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL Bryson, Diamantis, & Grant #aiethics…
(if you haven't read the paper, https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW)
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence #aiethics via @j2bryson
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence #aiethics via @j2bryson
Brilliant read on legal aspects of e-personalities: https://t.co/RENjCIY9pj #Digitalisierung #digitalisation #robotics #law
@MaxTalksAI @eduardfosch @RespRobotics @brain_on_dance @dreccollins @NoelSharkey @IEEESA @MarcelloIenca @grok_ @rcalo @hartzog There are a lot of small conveniences you can argue for, but what you'd do is open up a giant legal hole that damages society. Ou
@eduardfosch @RespRobotics @brain_on_dance @dreccollins @NoelSharkey @IEEESA @MarcelloIenca @grok_ @rcalo @hartzog In case you wonder why I'm listed on this tweet, see our publication on this topic: https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW (open access)
RT @j2bryson: Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL Bryson, Diamantis, & Grant #aiethics…
RT @jobucks: Concur .... technology is only there for us to use. We must be responsible for its use and mechanisms of accountability must…
Concur .... technology is only there for us to use. We must be responsible for its use and mechanisms of accountability must researched too. https://t.co/H7iOLxeMxn
RT @EvanSelinger: Really interesting article, esp. concerning two points. (1) Bad actors might try to use #robots as “liability management”…
RT @EvanSelinger: Really interesting article, esp. concerning two points. (1) Bad actors might try to use #robots as “liability management”…
Really interesting article, esp. concerning two points. (1) Bad actors might try to use #robots as “liability management” tools for evading responsibility. (2) “Veil piercing” is a legal conundrum when robots behave autonomously and the “principal-agent mo
@BrettFrischmann @BirgitSchippers @David_Gunkel @EvanSelinger Have you read the legal version of my position? https://t.co/Ep6GZIf4ky Philosophy version out by March, apparently. Still need a book version. Also, think we should all be reading about #moneyL
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
@Gary_An Yes, I push back on that too, but my main concern is the over personification of #ai leading to people wiggling out of responsibility. cf. https://t.co/CgV5CopUWQ and more formally https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW But I'm hoping to write soon on how wrong
@MattGuttmanOrg @FrankPasquale I disagree. First cut of why: https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW I'm hoping to write a more serious article / book chapter + talk (for this lecture series: https://t.co/QaPJh3aC6D ) this month. But if you have a good formal descriptio
RT @j2bryson: @jason_pontin @AndrewYNg Yeah, I'm not sure "under-appreciated" applies, but important & more attention would be good: https:…
RT @j2bryson: @jason_pontin @AndrewYNg Yeah, I'm not sure "under-appreciated" applies, but important & more attention would be good: https:…
@jason_pontin @AndrewYNg Yeah, I'm not sure "under-appreciated" applies, but important & more attention would be good: https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW https://t.co/Iy6BPjWgPi These two really are under-appreciated so far: https://t.co/T8FTzMQKNm https://t.co/
"Conferring legal personhood on purely synthetic entities is a very real legal possibility, one under consideration presently by the European Union. We show here that such legislative action would be morally unnecessary and legally troublesome." #AI https:
RT @j2bryson: Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL Bryson, Diamantis, & Grant #aiethics…
RT @j2bryson: Of, for, & by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL Bryson, Diamantis, & Grant #aiethics…
💡 Last week's most engaging news in #robotTax 👉 Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence via @j2bryson
@NoelSharkey Yeah, that's what our ai & law piece says https://t.co/bag5BaCCoW with some heavy hitter law profs if you need to impress someone with thud factor. I've had fairly major entrepreneur say the article changed their entire outlook.
Of, for, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons https://t.co/H0iMJvotmW #ai #machinelearning #artificialintelligence #inequality #aiethics via @j2bryson
@whoisgallifrey @hiroosa Nothing is truly autonomous, and legal fictions, while often usual, can cause enormous problems, and would certainly do so in the case of AI. PLEASE read our law paper: https://t.co/vOKx2ixPwL
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @kennethanderson: I would have thought the problem with extension of legal personhood to robots is not a cost-benefit issue; the issue i…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
Up until today, I thought proponents of "legal rights for robots" were just naive idiots who thoroughly misunderstood how AI works. I am a bit slow sometimes. https://t.co/XTAhUme4pw
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @JoannaCaytas: Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
Legal concepts of personhood intend unique protection for uniquely human characteristics. They cause systemic absurdities whenever extended by fiction to inanimate structures, always designed primarily to limit liability. https://t.co/LBxQRVSErK https://t.
With respect to my intervention on humanity as the core of motivation & justice, see this article (linked on my "professional" account) https://t.co/Ut7LEdc81q #IGF2017 #WS180
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @ghadfield: Interesting paper—recommending against extending legal personhood to robots. Two issues missing I think: 1. Doesn’t conside…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
I'm reading this on #springerlink https://t.co/XQhL0AGd8E
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @ghadfield: Interesting paper—recommending against extending legal personhood to robots. Two issues missing I think: 1. Doesn’t conside…
Interesting paper—recommending against extending legal personhood to robots. Two issues missing I think: 1. Doesn’t consider core question of enforcement of contracts 2. Doesn’t consider the innovation of novel legal institutions specifically for AI https
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…
RT @FrankPasquale: “We recommend against the extension of legal personhood to robots, because the costs are too great & the moral gains too…