Digital ecology: Artificial intelligence impact on legal and environmental sphere

A. Vasiliev, Y. Pechatnova, A. Mamychev
{"title":"Digital ecology: Artificial intelligence impact on legal and environmental sphere","authors":"A. Vasiliev, Y. Pechatnova, A. Mamychev","doi":"10.15421/2020_222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"and cannot be performed by even advanced artificial intelligence relying on deep-learning techniques. In addition, lawyer employment and wages have grown steadily over the last twenty years, evincing that the legal profession has benefited from new technologies, as it has throughout its history. Lastly, were large-scale automation of legal work possible, core societal values would counsel against it (Markovic, 2019). Ying Hu discusses the responsibility of robots, when a robot harms humans. He suggest that there are any grounds for holding it criminally liable for its misconduct, provided that the robot is capable of making, acting on, and communicating the reasons behind its moral decisions (Hu, 2019). If such a robot fails to observe the minimum moral standards that society requires of it, labeling it as a criminal can effectively fulfill criminal law’s function of censuring wrongful conduct and alleviating the emotional harm that may be inflicted on human victims. Imposing criminal liability on robots does not absolve robot manufacturers, trainers, or owners of their individual criminal liability. The former is not rendered redundant by the latter. It is possible that no human is sufficiently at fault in causing a robot to commit a particular morally wrongful action. Additionally, imposing criminal liability on robots might sometimes have significant instrumental value, such as helping to identify culpable individuals and serving as a self-policing device for individuals who interact with robots. Finally, treating robots that satisfy the above-mentioned conditions as moral agents appears much more plausible if we adopt a less human-centric account of moral agency. R.G. Wright also considers that most of the existing discussions of advanced robots as potential rights-bearers focus on the idea of some degree of consciousness, or at best, of self-consciousness with or without a capacity for sentient experience (Wright, 2019). Secondly, the legal regulation of cryptocurrencies is unanimously received by the scientific community. So, at less than a decade old, Bitcoin and other virtual currencies have had the major societal impact, and proven to be the unique payment systems challenge for law enforcement, financial regulatory authorities worldwide, and the investment community. Rapid introduction and diffusion of technological changes throughout society, such as the blockchain that serves as Bitcoin’s crypto-foundation, continue to exceed the ability of law and regulation to keep pace. During 2017 alone, the market price of Bitcoin rose 1,735%, from about $970 to $14,292, causing an investor feeding frenzy. As of September 11, 2018, a total of 1,935 cryptocurrencies are reported, having an approximate market capitalization of $191.54 billion at that date. A brief history of the fast moving adoption of blockchain-based technology is provided, along with a look at the efforts of regulators to keep up with the staggering worldwide growth in the usage of virtual currencies (Bitcoin, 2018). By the why, there are lots of cases, when market participants engage in fraud under the guise of offering digital instruments, especially with the use of virtual currencies. Though, the law enforcement has no opportunity to stop and prevent fraud in the offer and sale of digital instruments. Nima Zahadat points that despite the phenomenal growth in the digital world and crimes committed using digital techniques and tools, there are literally no foundational requirements to perform digital forensic investigations. While there are several private and mostly for-profit organizations that “sell” training and certifications regarding digital forensics credentials, at the international and state level, there seem to be nothing of the kind. However, digital forensic investigation is one of the prominent fields emerging from the broad discipline of forensic science [24]. Thirdly, smart contracts may prove the powerful Ukrainian Journal of Ecology Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 10(5), 2020 way to license copyright material and to provide higher levels of transparency in financial flows to creators. However, these achievements and the promise they hold are largely dependent on blockchain technologies achieving a degree of development, scalability, reliability and market adoption difficult to foresee at this stage. Still, should blockchain technology reach its market potential, it may have significant—perhaps transformative—impact on copyright in the digital environment (Blockchain, 2018). Also smart contracts suppose the specific procedure of personal identification. That is why, Lauren Stewart insists on that biometric identification technology is playing an increasingly significant role in the lives of consumers all over the world today. However, despite the benefits of increased data security and ease of consumer access to businesses’ services, lack of widespread biometric data regulation creates the potential for commercial misuse. Although some states of the United States of America, such as Illinois, Texas, and Washington, have adopted comprehensive biometric data regulation statutes, the statutes do not offer the consistent approach. Therefore, as more states are going to regulate businesses’ collection and use of biometric data, they should enact statutes that seek to balance protecting consumers’ biometric data from discriminatory use and businesses’ use of biometric data to enhance security and provide improved products and services.","PeriodicalId":23422,"journal":{"name":"Ukrainian Journal of Ecology","volume":"10 1","pages":"150-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ukrainian Journal of Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15421/2020_222","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

and cannot be performed by even advanced artificial intelligence relying on deep-learning techniques. In addition, lawyer employment and wages have grown steadily over the last twenty years, evincing that the legal profession has benefited from new technologies, as it has throughout its history. Lastly, were large-scale automation of legal work possible, core societal values would counsel against it (Markovic, 2019). Ying Hu discusses the responsibility of robots, when a robot harms humans. He suggest that there are any grounds for holding it criminally liable for its misconduct, provided that the robot is capable of making, acting on, and communicating the reasons behind its moral decisions (Hu, 2019). If such a robot fails to observe the minimum moral standards that society requires of it, labeling it as a criminal can effectively fulfill criminal law’s function of censuring wrongful conduct and alleviating the emotional harm that may be inflicted on human victims. Imposing criminal liability on robots does not absolve robot manufacturers, trainers, or owners of their individual criminal liability. The former is not rendered redundant by the latter. It is possible that no human is sufficiently at fault in causing a robot to commit a particular morally wrongful action. Additionally, imposing criminal liability on robots might sometimes have significant instrumental value, such as helping to identify culpable individuals and serving as a self-policing device for individuals who interact with robots. Finally, treating robots that satisfy the above-mentioned conditions as moral agents appears much more plausible if we adopt a less human-centric account of moral agency. R.G. Wright also considers that most of the existing discussions of advanced robots as potential rights-bearers focus on the idea of some degree of consciousness, or at best, of self-consciousness with or without a capacity for sentient experience (Wright, 2019). Secondly, the legal regulation of cryptocurrencies is unanimously received by the scientific community. So, at less than a decade old, Bitcoin and other virtual currencies have had the major societal impact, and proven to be the unique payment systems challenge for law enforcement, financial regulatory authorities worldwide, and the investment community. Rapid introduction and diffusion of technological changes throughout society, such as the blockchain that serves as Bitcoin’s crypto-foundation, continue to exceed the ability of law and regulation to keep pace. During 2017 alone, the market price of Bitcoin rose 1,735%, from about $970 to $14,292, causing an investor feeding frenzy. As of September 11, 2018, a total of 1,935 cryptocurrencies are reported, having an approximate market capitalization of $191.54 billion at that date. A brief history of the fast moving adoption of blockchain-based technology is provided, along with a look at the efforts of regulators to keep up with the staggering worldwide growth in the usage of virtual currencies (Bitcoin, 2018). By the why, there are lots of cases, when market participants engage in fraud under the guise of offering digital instruments, especially with the use of virtual currencies. Though, the law enforcement has no opportunity to stop and prevent fraud in the offer and sale of digital instruments. Nima Zahadat points that despite the phenomenal growth in the digital world and crimes committed using digital techniques and tools, there are literally no foundational requirements to perform digital forensic investigations. While there are several private and mostly for-profit organizations that “sell” training and certifications regarding digital forensics credentials, at the international and state level, there seem to be nothing of the kind. However, digital forensic investigation is one of the prominent fields emerging from the broad discipline of forensic science [24]. Thirdly, smart contracts may prove the powerful Ukrainian Journal of Ecology Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 10(5), 2020 way to license copyright material and to provide higher levels of transparency in financial flows to creators. However, these achievements and the promise they hold are largely dependent on blockchain technologies achieving a degree of development, scalability, reliability and market adoption difficult to foresee at this stage. Still, should blockchain technology reach its market potential, it may have significant—perhaps transformative—impact on copyright in the digital environment (Blockchain, 2018). Also smart contracts suppose the specific procedure of personal identification. That is why, Lauren Stewart insists on that biometric identification technology is playing an increasingly significant role in the lives of consumers all over the world today. However, despite the benefits of increased data security and ease of consumer access to businesses’ services, lack of widespread biometric data regulation creates the potential for commercial misuse. Although some states of the United States of America, such as Illinois, Texas, and Washington, have adopted comprehensive biometric data regulation statutes, the statutes do not offer the consistent approach. Therefore, as more states are going to regulate businesses’ collection and use of biometric data, they should enact statutes that seek to balance protecting consumers’ biometric data from discriminatory use and businesses’ use of biometric data to enhance security and provide improved products and services.
数字生态:人工智能对法律和环境领域的影响
即使是依靠深度学习技术的先进人工智能也无法完成。此外,律师的就业和工资在过去二十年中稳步增长,这表明法律职业从新技术中受益,就像它在整个历史中一样。最后,如果法律工作可能大规模自动化,核心社会价值观会反对它(马尔科维奇,2019)。应虎讨论了当机器人伤害人类时,机器人的责任。他认为,只要机器人能够做出、采取行动并传达其道德决策背后的原因,就有任何理由让它对自己的不当行为承担刑事责任(Hu, 2019)。如果这样的机器人没有遵守社会对它所要求的最低道德标准,那么给它贴上罪犯的标签可以有效地履行刑法的功能,即谴责不法行为,减轻可能对人类受害者造成的情感伤害。对机器人施加刑事责任并不能免除机器人制造商、培训师或所有者的个人刑事责任。前者并不因后者而显得多余。在导致机器人做出特定的道德错误行为时,可能没有人有足够的过错。此外,对机器人施加刑事责任有时可能具有重要的工具价值,例如帮助识别有罪的个人,并作为与机器人互动的个人的自我监管设备。最后,如果我们采用一种不那么以人为中心的道德代理解释,那么将满足上述条件的机器人视为道德代理似乎更加合理。R.G. Wright还认为,大多数关于先进机器人作为潜在权利承有者的现有讨论都集中在某种程度的意识上,或者充其量是具有或不具有感知体验能力的自我意识(Wright, 2019)。其次,加密货币的法律监管得到了科学界的一致认可。因此,在不到十年的时间里,比特币和其他虚拟货币已经产生了重大的社会影响,并被证明是执法部门、全球金融监管机构和投资界面临的独特支付系统挑战。技术变革在整个社会的快速引入和传播,例如作为比特币加密基础的区块链,继续超出法律和监管的能力。仅在2017年,比特币的市场价格就上涨了1735%,从约970美元涨至14292美元,引发了投资者的狂热追捧。截至2018年9月11日,共有1935种加密货币被报道,当时的市值约为1915.4亿美元。本文简要介绍了基于区块链技术的快速采用的历史,以及监管机构为跟上全球虚拟货币使用的惊人增长所做的努力(比特币,2018年)。说到原因,有很多情况下,市场参与者在提供数字工具的幌子下进行欺诈,特别是使用虚拟货币。然而,执法部门没有机会阻止和防止数字工具的提供和销售中的欺诈行为。Nima Zahadat指出,尽管数字世界和使用数字技术和工具犯下的罪行显著增长,但实际上没有进行数字法医调查的基本要求。虽然有一些私人和主要以营利为目的的组织“出售”有关数字取证证书的培训和认证,但在国际和州一级,似乎没有这种情况。然而,数字法医调查是法医学广泛学科中出现的突出领域之一。第三,智能合约可以证明强大的乌克兰生态学杂志乌克兰生态学杂志,10(5),2020许可版权材料的方式,并为创作者提供更高水平的资金透明度。然而,这些成就和它们所承载的希望在很大程度上取决于区块链技术在现阶段难以预见的发展程度、可扩展性、可靠性和市场采用。尽管如此,如果区块链技术达到其市场潜力,它可能会对数字环境中的版权产生重大的——也许是变革性的影响(区块链,2018)。此外,智能合约还假定了个人身份识别的具体过程。这就是为什么劳伦·斯图尔特坚持认为,生物识别技术在当今世界各地消费者的生活中发挥着越来越重要的作用。然而,尽管提高数据安全性和消费者访问企业服务的便利性带来了好处,但缺乏广泛的生物识别数据监管,可能会导致商业滥用。 尽管美国的一些州(如伊利诺斯州、德克萨斯州和华盛顿州)采用了全面的生物识别数据监管法规,但这些法规并没有提供一致的方法。因此,随着越来越多的州将规范企业收集和使用生物特征数据,它们应该制定法规,寻求平衡,保护消费者的生物特征数据不受歧视使用,以及企业使用生物特征数据以增强安全性并提供改进的产品和服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信