Proxy responsibility: addressing responsibility gaps in human-machine decision making on the resort to force.
The integration of AI in resort-to-force decision making gives rise to substantial threats and problems. One significant challenge is that incorporating a machine into the decision-making process can result in responsibility gaps for decisions informed or made by the machine. Ethically, a situation...
| Publicado en: | Australian Journal of International Affairs Vol. 78; no. 2; pp. 191 - 200 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Apr2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=177593933&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 177593933 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 10357718 UAF jtl: Australian Journal of International Affairs issn: 10357718 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Apr2024 vid: 78 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 177593933 10.1080/10357718.2024.2327384 ppf: 191 ppct: 9 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 661KB tig: atl: Proxy responsibility: addressing responsibility gaps in human-machine decision making on the resort to force. aug: au: Sienknecht, Mitja affil: European New School of Digital Studies, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany su: Decision making Peace negotiations Responsibility Artificial intelligence sug: subj: Decision making Peace negotiations Responsibility Artificial intelligence keyword: Artificial intelligence (AI) human-machine decision making resort to force responsibility ab: The integration of AI in resort-to-force decision making gives rise to substantial threats and problems. One significant challenge is that incorporating a machine into the decision-making process can result in responsibility gaps for decisions informed or made by the machine. Ethically, a situation in which lethal violence can be employed without a responsible subject to blame for any wrongdoing is unacceptable. But how can responsibility be attributed if a machine is involved in the decision-making process on war and peace? To address this question, I introduce the concept of 'proxy responsibility'. I contend that since we cannot ascribe moral responsibility to the AI artefact itself, we must identify responsibility relations in the structures in which AI decision making operates. A dynamic and contextual concept of responsibility positions AI in the broader decision-making process of the political, military, and economic system, and helps to unfold different responsibility layers among the involved actors. I argue that the more we move in the direction of machine autonomy, the denser the web of proxy responsibility relations in the environment of AI must become to address the aforementioned gaps in responsibility. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Australian Journal of International Affairs is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Australian Journal of International Affairs holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd dt: @attributes: year: 2024 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|