Abstract
AbstractThis article examines the complaint that arbitrary algorithmic decisions wrong those whom they affect. It makes three contributions. First, it provides an analysis of what arbitrariness means in this context. Second, it argues that arbitrariness is not of moral concern except when special circumstances apply. However, when the same algorithm or different algorithms based on the same data are used in multiple contexts, a person may be arbitrarily excluded from a broad range of opportunities. The third contribution is to explain why this systemic exclusion is of moral concern and to offer a solution to address it.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference54 articles.
1. Algorithmic Decision Making and the Cost of Fairness
2. Ilyas, Andrew , Santurkar, Shibani , Tsipras, Dimitris , Engstrom, Logan , Tran, Brandon , and Madry, Aleksander . 2019. “Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Features.” ArXiv:1905.02175.
3. What Is the Point of Equality?
4. The Scored Society: Due Process for Automated Predictions;Citron;Washington Law Review,2014
5. Dissecting the Algorithmic Leviathan: On the Socio-Political Anatomy of Algorithmic Governance;König;Philosophy and Technology,2020
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献