Select a result to preview

Backer2018AlgorithmToBindThemAll

Larry Backer "And an algorithm to bind them all? Social credit, Data driven governance, and the Emergence of an operating system for Global Normative Orders"

Bibliographic info

⇒ Backer, L. C. (2018). And an Algorithm to Bind Them All? Social Credit, Data Driven Governance, and the Emergence of an Operating System for Global Normative Orders. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3182889

Commentary

I thought the article presented an interesting take on AI reshaping law and governance in which physical space is replaced and changed to "space without spaces". This instantly reminded me in a sense of Foucault's concept of heterotopia, which I used as a start to read and interpret this article. This is also why because it sparked my personal interest. From this Foucaultian inspired reading, the article may be criticized as well. Most importantly, because I don't see this as a fundamental reshaping of law and governance, but more so calling a new, alternative spaceless space into existence. This new space would not negate the original physical space, but incorporate this in a new meaning as well. From this reading I think it's a weakness that the author insists on the fundamental reshaping of law. Rather, I believe there is a reshaping, but not one which negates the original, but one which encloses this original in the new alternative. There has always been social control, this is not new with AI. There has always been law, and there has always been illegal activity. For example, using AI for extortion is not fundamentally different from "original extortion", so the law need not be fundamentally changed. I think it would be better to think from a different starting point that includes the original into a new alternative and new type of space to drive new systems.

Excerpts & Key Quotes

AI fundamentally reshapes governance

Quotation here: "Yet both approaches fail to see the more important insight—that AI and big data management suggests the fundamental reshaping of law and law systems. This reshaping will have particular effect on the way on which the emerging polycentric systems of governance that have been the singular feature of globalized law frameworks may be enmeshed."

Comment:

I chose this quote because I it it illustrates the core argument of this article. Because I am doing a Public Administration master, it's mostly in this line of AI debate that I have to position myself somewhere. These are the topics I will come into contact with in the future as a practitioner or scholar, and the developments I need to be familiar with.

Democratic values

Quotation here: "The emergence of social credit initiatives powered by machine learning and AI enhanced algorithmic frameworks suggests a transformation of the basis on which one approaches the problem of law systems and their inter-spaces. On the other hand, it might also suggest a plausible end product of the movement from the legal certainty of a state-centered legal positivism to an organizationally based construct of legal pluralism: the idea that law is a product of human authority"

Comment:

I think this quote highlights the de-centering of the state and the rise of multiple governance centers with multiple forms of law, the idea begin that this excludes normal state-centered modes of governance. On the one hand, I agree with this observation, yet coming from Public Administration it doesn't sit right with me. Democracy is built upon an idea of legitimacy of state and government. In this sense law has always been a product of human authority, through the democratic majority. Therefore this de-centering and legal pluralism must in some way be fundamentally supported by democratic values, otherwise the human authority can degenerate the form of law.

Foucaultian notion of control

Quotation here: "Those possibilities suggest the possibility of an order that is neither dependent on space nor on a legal order. It does not occupy a space between legal orders, nor does it constitute its own legal order . But it can be used to manage (if not govern) the behaviors of those from whom data is extracted by imposing consequences from out of past behaviors that affect their ability to engage in future activity. What one may begin to define, then, is not so much a legal/normative order as much as an operating system."

Comment:

To continue my Foucaultian reading of this text, I picked this quote because it does not describe an operating system, but a controlling system. Essentially, this text is about control through AI and social credit initiatives. This passage reminded me of the Panopticon; due to this element of social control and law, which can in theory always be controlled and perceived, it has an effect on people's conduct.

ESDiT-shared - OLD 2021-11-03/esditHuman/Social Credit System

Excerpts & Key Quotes

⇒ For 3-5 key passages, include the following: a descriptive heading, the page number, the verbatim quote, and your brief commentary on this

  • Page 298:

Quotation here: "Pasquale Pasquale2015BlackBox says ‘authority is increasingly expressed algorithmically’. Yeung (2017) speaks of ‘algorithmic power’. This is not, of course, to say that all algorithms require governance or regulatory intervention. Gillespie (2014) has called certain kinds of algorithms ‘public relevance algorithms’ which have ‘political valence’. "

Comment:

I chose this quote to highlight the inconsistencies in the article, because when reading this it immediately struck me as an internally conflicting statement. In the article, the author explains there is always contestation. This is especially true of wicked problems where there is contestation both of values and information. In Public Administration it's accepted that wicked problems always require governance, therefore I think it's very confusing and conflicting to not expect the same for AI. Especially with an eye to the future, to be governance ready for AI means not falling back on older legislation, but trying to stay ahead as well. All AI that can make decisions and influence lives has public relevance, as everyone is increasingly confronted with it.

  • Page 303:

Quotation here: "regulation is never neutral: as Moe (1990) said, ‘for most issues, most of the time, a set of organized interest groups already occupies and structures the upper reaches of political decision making’. He suggests that compromise is often built into the construction of regulatory institutions, whether they are agencies or laws. Governance and regulation develop in a contested context."

Comment:

This quote is especially convincing for my criticisms, because if in PA we agree that regulation, governance, and policy are never neutral, why is this not accepted for AI? Algorithms take on the biases of the creator, therefore especially in the public domain this can have tremendous implications, think f.i. about systemic racism that is already (maybe even unknowingly) built into algorithmic decision making. Therefore, governance of algorithms is absolutely necessary.

  • Page 304:

Quotation here: "The overall conclusion from the Royal Society/IPSOSMori research and further survey evidence from the EU’s Digital Single Market programme (European Commission 2017) suggests that people are open to exploring the role of artificial intelligence, although they believe that these technologies require ‘careful management’."

Comment:

I believe this quote illustrates a societal call for governance of algorithms and AI, in order to legitimize and gain more trust in algorithmic governance. With a democratic system we trust the government to act in our best interest, but clearly we don't automatically trust the same for AI, rather we are more skeptical. Therefore governance of AI is the only way to legitimize AI outcomes and processes in a democratic system.
#algorithmicGovernance, #democracy