12 Amendments of Konstantinos ARVANITIS related to 2020/2017(INI)
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that AI may give rise to biases and thus to various forms of discrimination; in this regard, recalls that everyone’s rights must be ensured and that AI initiatives that lead to discriminatory processes should not be allowed; emphasizes that AI technologies should aim at not reflecting any sort of profiling bias whether regarding any identity, race, age, colour, gender or sexuality or disability;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that AI-powered education brings a wide range of possibilities and opportunities, while at the same time posing risks regarding equal access to education and learning equalities; expresses its concerns about lacking telecommunication infrastructures in some regions across the European Union, which limits the accessibility to the internet and calls on the Commission to deploy sustained efforts in ameliorating telecommunication infrastructures, particularly with regards to the public education sector; calls for the non- discriminatory use of AI in the education sector; recalls the risks and discrimination arising from recently developed AI tools used for school admission;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that AI-powered education brings a wide range of possibilities and opportunities, while at the same time posing risks regarding equal access to education and learning equalities; calls for the non-discriminatory use of AI in the education sector; calls not to underestimate the digital gender gap and to take measures to remedy it; recalls the risks and discrimination arising from recently developed AI tools used for school admission;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that artificial intelligence can reproduce and accentuate discriminatory processes ; requests that special attention be paid to this problem when designing and maintaining artificial intelligence; therefore recommends to ensure that the teams that design, develop, test and maintain, deploy and procure these systems, reflect the diversity of uses and society in general, and that they are diverse in terms of gender, culture and age to reflect all the essentials elements of society and avoid prejudice;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s plan to update the Digital Education Action Plan in order to make better use of data and AI-based technologies so as to make educational systems fit for the digital age; stresses that general public awareness of AI at all levels, including awareness of AI risks relating to privacy and bias, is essential for preparing everyone to make informed decisions; recalls that educating the public to ensure proper skills should be viewed as a prerequisite before the widespread use of AI, especially for children and vulnerable peoples;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that data protection and privacy can be particularly affected by AI; defends the principles established in the General Data Protection Regulation as guiding principles for AI deployment; calls for stronger protection and safeguards in the education sector where children’s data are concerned; recalls that children constitute a vulnerable public, which deserves particular attention and protection; strongly believes that AI technologies pose a risk regarding collection of individual data of students and teachers in particular, which could breach their human rights; recommends in this sense that audiovisual recording and monitoring devices should not be used in schools to collect data for AI- related purposes;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recognises the threat that automation and AI might pose to employment and reiterates the need to maintain jobs as a priority, particularly in education, cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need for explicability of AI algorithms and the possibility of human verification and for due process, including the right of appeal, especially for decisions taken within the framework of prerogatives of public power; urges the Commission to ensure that systems and methods are in place to allow verification of the algorithm and access to remedies;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need for full transparency and explicability of AI algorithms and the possibility of human verification and for due process, including the right of appeal, especially for decisions taken within the framework of prerogatives of public power;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the risks of AI assisting the spread of disinformation and deep fakes in the digital environment and to propose recommendations, among others, for action against any AI-powered threats to free and fair elections and democracy;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that AI tools have the potential to fight illegal content online, but strongly recalls, ahead of the Digital Services Act expected for the end of this year, that such tools should always respect fundamental rights, especially freedom of expression, and should not lead to a general monitoring of the internet; nor to the removal of material disseminated for education, journalistic, artistic or research purposes;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that AI tools have the potential to fight illegal content online, but strongly recalls, ahead of the Digital Services Act expected for the end of this year, that such tools should always respect fundamental rights, especially freedom of expression and information, and should not lead to a general monitoring of the internet;