10 Amendments of Fabio Massimo CASTALDO related to 2020/2012(INL)
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines at the same time all the risks and challenges of unregulated use of AI; strongly believes technological advances in the field have to go hand in hand with an ample discussion on the ethical aspects of the use of AI and its impacts on societies and communities, including in the field of security and defence;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the EU to work towards achieving convergence with like-minded third countries in the field pertaining the ethic of AI as well as to keep contributing in multilateral fora to build a consensus on a human-centric AI, with the goal of fostering an international regulatory framework putting a human-centric approach at its core;
Amendment 61 #
6. Stresses that for any defence application of AI enabled systems, the Union should set technical and organisational standards to ensure their resilience against vulnerabilities that can exploited by external attacks, cyber- attacks and digital influence targeting the data, the model or the underlying infrastructure, both software and hardware, as well as their compliance with the highest possible trustworthiness standards as regards the collection and exploitation of operational data throughout a system’s entire lifecycle;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses, especially in security and defence domains, the importance of human oversight over AI, which can be achieved through a human-in-command approach, meaning the capability by human operators to oversee the overall activity of the AI system and the ability to decide when and how to use the system in any particular situation, including the ability to override a decision made by the system at any time;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Recalls its previous positions on lethal autonomous weapon systems and calls once again for the urgent development and adoption of a common position on lethal autonomous weapon systems, for an international ban on the development, production and use of lethal autonomous weapon systems enabling strikes to be carried out without meaningful human control, and for a start to effective negotiations for their prohibition;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that the entire responsibility for the decision to design, develop, deploy and use AI-systems must rest on human operators and the human-in- the-loop and human-in-command principles must also be applied to the command and control of AI-enabled systems; stresses that AI-enabled systems must allow the military leadership to assume its full responsibility and exercise the necessary level of judgment for taking lethal or large-scale destructive action be means of such systems;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses the importance of putting in place mechanism to ensure responsibility and accountability for AI systems and their outcomes, including the setup of governance frameworks ensuring accountability for the ethical dimensions of decisions associated with the development, deployment and use of AI;
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the EU to institutionalise a dialogue between policy makers, developers and users of AI technology on the ethical and legal limits of AI and to inform the public at large about the advantages, the risks and the challenges posed by AI at a practical and ethical level;
Amendment 113 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Underlines the importance to invest in the development of human capital for artificial intelligence, fostering the necessary skills and education in an AI-enabled world; stresses in particular the importance to ensure the proper skills and training of ethicists in this field;