20 Amendments of Kostas CHRYSOGONOS related to 2018/2088(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission and other competent institutions to collaborate closely with technicalmulti-disciplinary teams of researchers to investigate, prevent, and mitigate potential harmful effects of malicious or negligent uses and to develop tools, policies, and norms appropriate to AI applications; stresses the need to develop knowledge-exchange programs and facilitate joint-strategy development between civil society organisations; notes that best practices should be identified in research areas with more mature methods for addressing dual- use concerns, such as security and privacy, and that they should be applied to the area of AI;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the fact that malicious or negligent use of AI could threaten democracy, the rule of law, digital security, physical security, and political security as it could be used to conduct large-scale, finely-targeted and highly- efficient attacks; stresses that the use and development of AI poses risks for human rights, such as privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression and information, and that in the future it may pose further risks that are still unknown; calls on the competent authorities to effectively prevent and strictly prohibit the malicious and negligent use of AI;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines that the automation of certain jobs may reduce the possibility for social mobility and benefit the wealthiest, able to adapt better to this change;
Amendment 26 #
4. Calls on the Ccommisspetent EU institutions to ensure that any EUthe EU regulatory framework on AI guarantees personal data protection, including the principles of lawfulness, fairness and transparency, data protection by design and default, purpose limitation and data minimisation in compliance with Union data protection law, as well as personal safety and other fundamental rights, such as the right to freedom of expression and information; calls on the Commission to continually assess such a regulatory framework and, if necessary, to propose the appropriate amendments to keep it updated with the technological developments;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses the need to systematically and immediately invest in developing the future expertise needed, and particularly in training researchers on several disciplines - including applied ethics - specialised on AI technology, robotics, and related fields;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to establish the European AI Alliance tasked with developing draft AI ethical guidelines; calls on the Commission to complete the work and publish the guidelines, and to continue working towards an EU-wide approach; invites the Commission to initiate a political process on a global level aiming at the development of EU-wide high standards in the field of AI;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that any AI system must be developed with respect for the principles of transparency, allowing for human understanding of its actions; notes that in order to build trust in and enable the progress of AI, users must be aware of how their data is used and when they are communicating or interacting with an AI system; believes that this will contribute to better understanding and confidence among users when dealing with machines; stresses that the explainaintelligibility of decisions must be an EU standard in accordance with Articles 13, 14 and 15 of the GDPR; stresses that individuals have the right to a final determination being made by a person, according to Article 22 of the GDPR, individuals have the right to obtain human intervention when a decision based on automated processing significantly affects them;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Stresses that, because of the data sets and algorithmic systems used when making assessments and predictions at the different stages of data processing, big data may result not only in infringements of the fundamental rights of individuals, but also in differential treatment of and indirect discrimination against groups of people with similar characteristics; calls on the competent authorities to take any possible measures in order to ensure the quality of the data used, to avoid bias or to make sure that the relevant programs does not take any bias into account, to prevent algorithmic discrimination and to develop a strong and common ethical framework for the transparent processing of personal data and automated decision-making that may guide data usage and the ongoing enforcement of Union law;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Highlights the importance to establish a regulatory framework to control algorithms and their impact is therefore,including the possibility of engaging independent auditors for algorithms (or even software watchdogs, or a regulator that can investigate AI automated decisions;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7 d. Considers that in order to avoid the erosion of human privacy and autonomy it is vital to resist the temptation to use AI systems before appropriate cultural and legal frameworks are adapted;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Highlights that AI research or other relevant activities shall respect fundamental rights and be conducted in the interests of the well-being and self- determination of the individual and society at large in their design, implementation, dissemination and use. Human dignity and autonomy – both physical and psychological – shall always to be respected;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Stresses that AI research or other relevant activities shall be conducted in accordance with the precautionary principle, anticipating potential safety impacts of outcomes and taking due precautions, proportional to the level of protection, while encouraging progress for the benefit of society and the environment;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Stresses that AI engineers and their employers shall consider and respect people’s physical wellbeing, safety, health and rights and preserve human wellbeing, while also respecting human rights, and disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8 d. Considers that AI engineers and their employers shall be accountable for the social, environmental and human health impacts that robotics may impose on present and future generations;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8 e. Underlines that is shall be fully ensured that private information is kept secure and only used appropriately;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8 f. Stresses that it shall be fully guaranteed that individuals are not personally identifiable, aside from exceptional circumstances and then only with clear, unambiguous informed consent; emphasises that human informed consent shall be pursued and obtained prior to any man-machine interaction; highlights that in this context appropriate procedures shall be developed and followed for valid consent, confidentiality, anonymity, fair treatment and due process; all the responsible persons shall immediately fully comply with any requests that any related data be destroyed, and removed from any datasets;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
8 g. Highlights that, where risks arise as an unavoidable and integral element of the AI research, robust risk assessment and management protocols shall be developed and complied with, taking into account that the risk of harm shall be no greater than that encountered in ordinary life, (i.e. people shall not be exposed to risks greater than or additional to those to which they are exposed in their normal lifestyles);
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 h (new)
Paragraph 8 h (new)
8 h. Stresses that the operation of an AI system shall always be based on a thorough risk assessment process, which shall be informed by the precautionary and proportionality principles;