Abstract
Applications of artificial intelligence, algorithmic differentiation, and automated decision‐making systems aim to improve the efficiency of decision‐making for differentiating persons. However, they may also pose new risks to fundamental rights, including the risk of discrimination and potential violations of human dignity. Anti‐discrimination law is not only based on the principles of justice and equal treatment but also aims to ensure the free development of one’s personality and the protection of human dignity. This article examines developments in AI and algorithmic differentiation from the perspective of human dignity. Problems addressed include the expansion of the reach of algorithmic decisions, the potential for serious, systematic, or structural discrimination, the phenomenon of statistical discrimination and the treatment of persons not as individuals, deficits in the regulation of automated decisions and informed consent, the creation and use of comprehensive and personality‐constituting personal and group profiles, and the increase in structural dominance.
Reference76 articles.
1. Baer, S. (2009). Dignity, liberty, equality: A fundamental rights triangle of constitutionalism. University of Toronto Law Journal, 59(4), 417–468.
2. Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big data’s disparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3), 671–732.
3. Beeghly, E. (2018). Failing to treat persons as individuals. Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 5(26), 687–711.
4. Binns, R., Van Kleek, M., Veale, M., Lyngs, U., Zhao, J., & Shadbolt, N. (2018). ‘It’s reducing a human being to a percentage’: Perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions [Paper presentation]. 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada.
5. Britz, G. (2007). Freie Entfaltung durch Selbstdarstellung. Eine Rekonstruktion des allgemeinen Persönlichkeitsrechts aus Art. 2 I GG. Mohr Siebeck.
Cited by
2 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