89 Amendments of Eva KAILI related to 2018/2088(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas transparent and ethics embedded AI and robotics have the potential to reshape multiple industries and lead to greater efficiencies;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas machine learning raises also challenges to ensure non- discrimination, due process, transparency and understandability in decision-making processes;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas existing rules and processes should be modifiedreviewed and modified if necessary to account for artificial intelligence and robotics;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the developments in artificial intelligence can and should be designed in such a way that they preserve the dignity, autonomy and self- determination of the individual;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the trend towards automation requires that those involved in the development and commercialisation of artificial intelligence applications build in security and ethics at the outset, thereby recognizing that they must be prepared to accept legal liability for the quality of the technology they produce;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in the absence of policy intervention, the implementation of AI alone doesmay not ensurlead to absolute truth or fairness, as bias is introducedcan emerge in how the data is collected, selected and how thecurated as well as in how algorithm iss are written and trained;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas AI and robotics should be developed to complement and prioritize humans and promote human-centred development;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas AI might be very energy intensive, it is important to advance AI use at the same time that we keep our energy efficiency and circular economy targets intact.
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas AI can significantly help Europe achieve its overreaching economic, social and environmental goals, as embedded in the EU Agenda 2030.
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas further development and increased use of automated and algorithmic decision-making undoubtedly has an impact on the choices that a private person (such as a business or an internet user) and an administrative, judicial or other public authority take in rendering their final decision of a consumer, business or authoritative nature; whereas safeguards and the possibility of human control and verification need to be built into the process of automated and algorithmic decision-making;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes the recent developments in monitoring and adapting to behavioural analytics. Calls on the Commission to develop an ethical framework that limits its use. Urges the European Commission to create awareness and an information campaign on AI and its use on behavioural analytics. Calls for the introduction of ethical rules on brain computer interface use and applications (such as mind reading) in order to avoid negative implication of that technology.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission to propose a framework that penalizes perception manipulation practices when personalized content or news feed leads to negative feelings and distortion of the perception of reality that might lead to negative consequences (for example, election outcomes, or distorted perceptions on social matters like migration).
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Calls on the Commission to respect the right of citizens to an offline life and to ensure that there will be no discrimination of citizens that there are no data recorded on them.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges the Commission and Member States to focus on retraining workers in the industries most affected by the automation of tasks; stresses that new education programmes should focus on developing the skills of workers so that they can seize job opportunities within the new jobs created by AI;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Urges the Commission and the Member States to develop and pursue digital skills training and retraining strategies that can ensure European society’s active and inclusive participation in the paradigm shift;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure protection of workers and working conditions in the face of technological transformation, providing for those who lose their jobs during re-skilling to avoid large-scale economic or social unrest in line with the European Pillar of Social Rights;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission to invest in education and skills for workers but at the same time to explore and evaluate other supporting measures such as a universal basic income or an increased social security for a transitional period and for specific job sectors that might be drastically affected by the introduction of advanced AI systems and automation.
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that AI and robotics have potential benefits in the care-giving sector as life expectancy increases, for instance helping doctors and nurses to have more time for high value activities(e.g. patient interaction);
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recommends a focus on clear disclosure of AI devices being utilized by seniors with their families, caregivers and manufacturers or health/insurance providers to avoid manipulation or data breaches that could cause widespread harm regarding AI adoption or consumer trust;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to consider the creation of centres of excellence for the monitoring of robot technologies, suggest the creation of a data bases of AI applications describing the characteristics and taxonomy in order to model a framework of regulatory sandboxes, running hackathons that promote AI for good, create a code of conduct and standards that could be the beneficial outcome of that AI excellence centre in helping member states and private stakeholders.
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the ambition of Japan’s Robot Strategy to have 4 out of 5 patients opt for robotic care and calls on the Commission to reciprocate this ambitionand calls on the Commission to consider similar strategies, taking into account the cultural perspective of European societies;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes the importance of greater investment in this field in order to remain competitive; recognises that while most of the investment and innovation in this area comes from private sector ventures, Member States and the Commission should also be encouraged to continue investing in research in this sector and outline their development priorities; considers that the coordination of private- and public-sector investment should be encouraged to ensure that development is focused;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that investment in the development of AI ethics should also be encouraged, with the recognition that methodologies utilizing value-driven design or Responsible Research and Innovation, provide greater opportunities to avoid unintended negative consequences with AI implementation and greater opportunity for innovation than without ethics-by-design.
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the ambition of the European Commission for more than 20 billion euros per year in the EU in public and private research and development investments in AI and stresses the need to increase this pace in order to remain competitive on AI technology development in the world.
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Stresses that investments on AI which can have significant uncertainty levels, should be complemented by EU funding for example from EIB, EIF, or through InvestEU andEFSI, schemes which can help on risk sharing.
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Calls on the Commission to ensure coordination and scaling of European policy as Europe has a lot of AI start-ups that are fragmented.
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 e (new)
Paragraph 6 e (new)
6e. Urges the Commission to not allow EU funding for weaponized AI. Furthermore, suggests that the EU must keep the intellectual property of research conducted with EU public money. Urges the Commission to exclude from EU funding, companies that are researching and developing AI consciousness.
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the future of this technology is contingent on societal acceptance and that greater emphasis must be placed on training and education to ensure greater understanding of the technology and its role; also notes that if consumers aresociety is not willing to adopt thisAI technologyies, there will be less drive for innovation in this sector;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights the importance of public policies which ensure social inclusion and internal cohesion within the EU in the adoption of AI in the public and private sector;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Recommends to the Commission to ensure that the intellectual property of research conducted with EU funding should remain in European universities.
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Highlights that cloud computing has a key role to play in driving the uptake of AI. Access to cloud services allows private companies, public institutions, research and academic institutions, and users to develop and use AI in an efficient and economically viable way.
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the use of experimental policymaking such as randomized controlled trials or regulatory sandboxes to introduce, in cooperation with regulators, innovative new ideas, allowing safeguards to be built into the technology from the start, thus facilitating and encouraging its market entry;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that a significant challenge to the future of AI systems is the inconsistent quality of software production technology and therefore there is a great need of standardization of the construction and use of AI systems.
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 8 a (new)
Subheading 8 a (new)
Agriculture/Food chain
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes that AI can catalyse a disruptive transformation of the current food system towards a more diverse, resilient, regionally adapted and healthy model for the future.
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Notes that before any AI system is put into use, we need assurances that it is safe and secure.
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Notes that AI can play in efforts to help tackle food security issues, predict famine and foodborne disease outbreaks, reduce food loss and waste and help improve sustainable management of land, water and other environmental resources critical to ecosystem health.
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Recommends the use and promotion of public-private partnerships to explore solutions to key challenges such as building a data ecosystem, favouring the access, sharing and flow of data while safeguarding people’s privacy rights.
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Highlights that AI can intervene at critical points along the food system value chain from production to consumption and enhance our capacity to fundamentally alter the way we produce, process and buy food from informing land use planning.
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Notes that AI can improve resource management and input efficiency, to help reduce post-harvest waste and influence consumption choices.
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Notes that AI in the form of precision farming holds the potential to disrupt on farm production of food as well as broader land management by improving land use planning, predicting land use change and monitoring crop health whilst having the potential to transform the prediction of extreme weather events.
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8f. Notes that AI can radically alter the delivery of inputs, control of pests and management of farms, influence farming practices, alter the way insurance products are delivered or help predict and avoid future famine and severe acute malnutrition outbreaks.
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
8g. Notes that AI can enable more optimal decisions about how to manage farm systems and stimulate the development of decision support and recommender systems. by improving farm efficiencies and farm health.
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the availability of high quality and meaningful data is essential for real competitiveness in the AI industry, and calls for public authorities to ensure ways of producing, sharing and governing data by making data a common good while safeguarding privacy and sensitive data;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that Member States should invest also in education and AI training programs in order to assist public sector employees in adopting the use of AI and robotics. Notes that there should be also information campaigns towards the citizens who will use public sector services provided by AI systems and robotics in order to calm their fears over loss of control of their personal data and establish trust.
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes the impact that AI has already had on the designing of personalised treatments and on predicting heart attacks; as well as other health issues such as epileptic seizures.
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that when AI is combined with human diagnosis the error rate is 0.5⁰%, compared with 3.5⁰% for diagnosis bytends to be significantly lower than when with human doctors alone;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 14 a (new)
Subheading 14 a (new)
Calls on the Commission to oblige the online intermediation service companies to release any data that could be beneficial to the common good, while ensuring that insurance companies will be forbidden to discriminate on citizens based on AI ranking results and from their right to be insured.
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 14 b (new)
Subheading 14 b (new)
Urges the Commission to take note of the social challenges arising from practices resulting from the ranking of citizens. Citizens should not be discriminated based on their ranking and they should be entitled to "another chance".
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 16 a (new)
Subheading 16 a (new)
Calls on the European Commission to guarantee the protection of citizens from any AI ranking decision systems in public administrations, similar to those planned to be utilised in China.
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 16 b (new)
Subheading 16 b (new)
Calls on the Commission to ensure that whoever produces deepfake material or synthetic videos or any other realistically made synthetic videos to state explicitly that they are not original.
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Encourages the completion of the European Commission’s strategy for Cybersecurity, and suggests to embed capacity-building in cybersecurity in this industrial policy, to ensure the development and deployment of safe AI and Robotic systems, resilient to cyberattacks. Encourages European stakeholders to research and engineers features that would facilitate the detection of accidentally or maliciously corrupted AI & Robotics systems.
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Calls on the Commission to explore the use of blockchain based cybersecurity applications that improve the resilience, trust and robustness of AI infrastructures through disintermediated models of data encryption. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility to reward citizens for their data through tokens.
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Notes the ongoing work of the ISO on AI and urges the Member States to coordinate their ISO members to defend as best as possible the European values and interests in the development of standards.
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that the prevalence of autonomous vehicles in the future will shift the liability from the driver to the vehicle, requiringautomaker, so governments will need to adjust legal definitions of liability and insurance companies to shift how they incorporate risk into their underwriting;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes the work being conducted globally and recognises the need to work proactively with partners especially at OECD and G20, in shaping the direction this industry moves in to ensure that the EU remains competitive and safeguards equal access among nations as well as sharing the benefits of AI development as widely as possible;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Believes that the development and use of AI needs to be governed by a code of ethics in the same way that human behaviour is guided; recognises that in order to do this, rules must be in place to increase the accountability and transparency of algorithmic decision- making systems;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Considers it essential for the Union to develop a regulatory framework based on ethical principles in line with the complexity of AI and its many social, medical and bioethical implications;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Points out that the guiding ethical framework should be based on the principles of beneficence, non- maleficence, autonomy and justice, on the principles and values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, such as human dignity, equality, justice and equity, non-discrimination, informed consent, private and family life and data protection, as well as on other underlying principles and values of the Union law, such as non-stigmatisation, transparency, autonomy, individual responsibility and social responsibility, and on existing ethical practices and codes;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Stresses the importance, as regards to ethical standards, of ensuring that AI products respect the fundamental rights of individuals and society, which should be protected at Union level, by providing for any necessary technical measures which ensure such respect from the design stage, in accordance with the so-called privacy by design approach;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the creationWelcomes the work of the European Commission high level expert group on AI and supports the development of an ethical charter of best practice for AI and robotics that companies and expertAI developers, vendors and distributors should follow;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights the importance of the purpose and intent in the application of AI and the need for a regulatory distinction between mistakes that arise from malfeasance and those that arise from innovative practices;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for people to have a right of appeal when AI is used for decisions affecting individuals especially in sensitive applications;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Highlights the importance of the explainability of outputs of the algorithms making them understandable by non- technical audiences, which is necessary to evaluate fairness and gain trust.
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that specific ethical issues are raised by the lack of transparency of theseAI technologies raises a number of ethical issin particular deep learning and reinforcement learning techniques;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Notes that disclosing the computer code itself would be ineffective because it would not reveal the inherent biases that exist and would fail to explain the machine-learning process; cites as an example of this Google’s 'PageRank' algorithm, which enabled website owners to manipulate their pages with hidden content that would be interpreted as desirable in order to increase views;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Stresses the need for the development of protocols for the on-going monitoring and detection of algorithmic bias; Points out that designers of algorithms should be trained and accompanied in order to consider essential requirements such as fairness or explainability from the beginning of the design phase and throughout the development cycle;
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29b. Acknowledges that although transparency and explainability may allow for the discovery of deficiencies, they do not guarantee the reliability, security and fairness of an ADS; therefore, accountability is the most important requirement that can be achieved via different means such as algorithm impact assessments (AIA), auditing and certification.
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)
Paragraph 29 c (new)
29c. Stresses that algorithms used in decision-making systems should not be deployed without a prior Algorithmic Impact Assessment (AIA) unless it is clear that they have no significant impact on the life of individuals; the certification of algorithmic decision-making systems should be encouraged and even mandatory in certain sectors.
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 d (new)
Paragraph 29 d (new)
29d. Highlights the principle of transparency, namely that it should always be possible to supply the rationale behind any decision taken with the aid of AI that can have a substantive impact on one or more persons’ lives;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 e (new)
Paragraph 29 e (new)
29e. Considers that it must always be possible to reduce the AI system´s computations to a form comprehensible by humans; considers that AI products should be equipped with a ‘black box’ which records data on every transaction carried out by the machine, -including the logic that contributed to its decisions - as well as with a “switch-off’ button which would instantly deactivate the AI system after requested by a human.
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 f (new)
Paragraph 29 f (new)
29f. Stresses that AI systems must always identify themselves as such and state that clearly in every interaction they have with humans.
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 g (new)
Paragraph 29 g (new)
29g. Believes that artificial intelligence, especially those with built-in autonomy, including the capability to independently extract, collect and share sensitive information with various stakeholders, and the possibility of self-learning or even evolving to self-modify, should be subject to robust conceptual laws or principles. Stresses that AI systems must not keep or disclose personal confidential information without explicit approval from the source of that information.
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 h (new)
Paragraph 29 h (new)
29h. Reiterates that the right to the protection of private life and the right to the protection of personal data as enshrined in Article 7 and 8 CFR and Article 16 TFEU apply to all areas of robotics and artificial intelligence and that the Union legal framework for data protection must be fully complied with; underlines the responsibility of designers of robotics and artificial intelligence to develop products in such a way that they are safe, secure and fit for purpose and follow procedures for data processing compliant with existing legislation, confidentiality, anonymity, fair treatment and due process;
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 i (new)
Paragraph 29 i (new)
29i. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any Union legislation on artificial intelligence will include measures and rules which take into account the rapid technological evolution in this field, to ensure that Union legislation does not lag behind the curve of technological development and deployment; stresses the need for such legislation to be compliant with rules on privacy and data protection, i.e. concerning information obligations, the right to obtain an explanation of a decision based on automated processing, the requirement to follow the principles of privacy by design and by default, the principles of proportionality, necessity, data minimisation, purpose limitation, as well as transparent control mechanisms for data subjects and data protection authorities, and appropriate remedies incompliance with current legislation; calls for the review of rules, principles and criteria regarding the use of cameras and sensors in robots, artificial intelligence in accordance with the Union legal framework for data protection;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 j (new)
Paragraph 29 j (new)
29j. Suggests that AI research activities should 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 304 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 k (new)
Paragraph 29 k (new)
29k. Notes that AI engineers or the companies employing them should remain accountable for the social, environmental and human health impacts that AI systems or robotics may impose on present and future generations.
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 l (new)
Paragraph 29 l (new)
29l. Stresses that the right to privacy must always be respected. An AI developer should guarantee that individuals are not personally identifiable, aside from exceptional circumstances and then only with clear, unambiguous informed consent. Human informed consent should be pursued and obtained prior to any man-machine interaction. As such, AI designers have a responsibility to develop and follow procedures for valid consent, confidentiality, anonymity, fair treatment and due process. Designers will comply with any requests that any related data be destroyed, and removed from any datasets.
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 m (new)
Paragraph 29 m (new)
29m. Calls on the Commission to ensure that applications based on AI should not use data collected from various sources without first the explicit consent of the data subject which has to be reaffirmed on a regular basis. (For example the collection of data by idle sensors, like but not restricted to microphones and cameras.). Calls on the Commission to create a framework that makes sure that explicit consent given by the subject of data, will generate data only for the intended purposes and not for uses that the subject of data did not give his consent.
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 17
Subheading 17
Governance/Cybersecurity
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Stresses the different models being developed in third countries, concretely in the US, China, Russia and Israel, and highlights the values-based approach used in Europe and the need to work with international partners in bilateral and multilateral settings, for an ethical advancement and adoption of AI; recognises that this technology does not have any borders and requires cooperation beyond that of the EU Member States alone;
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to work at an international level to ensure maximal consistency between international players noting that the EU would not compromise its own values for reaching those agreements;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Welcomes the different strategies developed by the Member States;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that start-ups and SMEs will have access and tools to necessary data in order to be competitive in the AI race.
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to consider setting up a task force or a European Oversight Mechanism for AI with a view to providing the technical, ethical and regulatory expertise needed to support the relevant public actors, at both Union and Member State level, in their efforts to ensure a timely, ethical and well- informed response to the new opportunities and challenges; as well as to provide guidance to industry and academia in the development and use of ethical AI; Such an entity could safeguard that AI systems are designed and operate to reflect human values such as fairness, accountability, and transparency and avoid (new)inequalities and biases
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Believes that enhanced cooperation between the Member States and the Commission is necessary in order to guarantee coherent cross-border rules in the Union which encourage the collaboration between European industries and allow the deployment in the whole Union of AI which are consistent with the required levels of safety and security, as well as the ethical principles enshrined in Union law;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34b. Emphasises that the Union has an excellent opportunity to become the global leader in the responsible innovation of AI and to be a credible actor in shaping its development and markets globally, in collaboration with our international partners in a socially robust and ethically sound manner;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)
Paragraph 34 c (new)
34c. Recommends that existing and future AI-related initiatives and pilot projects carried out by the Commission should be closely coordinated, possibly under the guidance of the proposed oversight mechanism, so as to realise synergy effects and ensure the creation of real added value while avoiding costly double structures;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 d (new)
Paragraph 34 d (new)
34d. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the creation of a European regulatory agency for AI and algorithmic decision-making tasked with: ○ Establishing a risk assessment matrix for classifying algorithm types and application domains according to potential for significant negative impact on citizens. ○ Investigating the use of algorithmic systems where there is a suspicion (e.g. evidence provided by a whistle-blower) of infringement of human rights. ○ Advising other regulatory agencies regarding algorithmic systems as they apply to the remit of those agencies. ○ Facilitating the effectiveness of the tort liability mechanism as means for regulating accountability of algorithmic systems by providing a contact point for citizens who are not familiar with legal procedures. ○ Auditing the Algorithmic Impact Assessments of high-level impact systems to approve or reject the proposed uses of algorithmic decision-making in highly sensitive and/or safety-critical application domains (e.g. private health-care). The Algorithmic Impact Assessment for private sector applications could follow a very similar process as the one we proposed for the public sector, with the possible difference that the various stages of public disclosure could be handled as confidential communication to the regulatory agency (under non-disclosure agreement) in order to safeguard vital trade secrets. ○ Investigating suspected cases of rights violations by algorithmic decision-making systems, for both individual decision instances (e.g. singular aberrant outcomes) and statistical decision patterns (e.g. discriminatory bias). Investigations could be triggered following the lodging of complaints, or on the basis of evidence provided by whistle-blowers, investigative journalists or independent researchers (including NGOs and academics).