“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/6784 |
Resumo: | The goal of this article is to argue that the debate regarding algorithmic decision-making and its impact on fundamental rights is not well-addressed and should be reframed in order to allow for adequate regulatory policies regarding recent technological developments in automation. A review of the literature on algorithms and an analysis of Articles 6, IX and 20 of the Brazilian Federal Law n° 13.709/2018 (LGPD) lead to the conclusion that claims that algorithmic decisions are unlawful because of profiling or because they replace human analysis are imprecise and do not identify the real issues at hand. Profiles are nothing more than generalizations, largely accepted in legal systems, and there are many kinds of decisions based on generalizations which algorithms can adequately make with no human intervention. In this context, this article restates the debate about automated decisions and fundamental rights focusing on two main obstacles: (i) the potential for discrimination by algorithmic systems and (ii) accountability of their decision-making processes. Lastly, the arguments put forward are applied to the current case of the covid-19 pandemic to illustrate the challenges ahead. |
id |
UNICEUB-3_4cb9a0a4639e585fd7f007c74ff2d362 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:oai.uniceub.emnuvens.com.br:article/6784 |
network_acronym_str |
UNICEUB-3 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake?Law; Constitutional Law; Regulatory Policy; Public PolicyAlgorithms; Automated decisions; Decision-making; Human rights; Fundamental rights; Human dignityThe goal of this article is to argue that the debate regarding algorithmic decision-making and its impact on fundamental rights is not well-addressed and should be reframed in order to allow for adequate regulatory policies regarding recent technological developments in automation. A review of the literature on algorithms and an analysis of Articles 6, IX and 20 of the Brazilian Federal Law n° 13.709/2018 (LGPD) lead to the conclusion that claims that algorithmic decisions are unlawful because of profiling or because they replace human analysis are imprecise and do not identify the real issues at hand. Profiles are nothing more than generalizations, largely accepted in legal systems, and there are many kinds of decisions based on generalizations which algorithms can adequately make with no human intervention. In this context, this article restates the debate about automated decisions and fundamental rights focusing on two main obstacles: (i) the potential for discrimination by algorithmic systems and (ii) accountability of their decision-making processes. Lastly, the arguments put forward are applied to the current case of the covid-19 pandemic to illustrate the challenges ahead.UniCEUBMattiuzzo, Marcela2021-04-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/678410.5102/rbpp.v11i1.6784Brazilian Journal of Public Policy; v. 11, n. 1 (2021)Revista Brasileña de Políticas Públicas; v. 11, n. 1 (2021)Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas; v. 11, n. 1 (2021)2236-16772179-8338reponame:Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online)instname:Centro de Ensino de Brasília (UNICEUB)instacron:UNICEUBenghttps://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/6784/pdfDireitos autorais 2021 Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicasinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-11-08T00:03:14Zoai:oai.uniceub.emnuvens.com.br:article/6784Revistahttp://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/index.php/RBPPPRIhttps://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/oaiatendimento.seer@uniceub.br||rbppuniceub@gmail.com|| prisqua@gmail.com|| marcelodvarella@gmail.com2236-16772179-8338opendoar:2021-11-08T00:03:14Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) - Centro de Ensino de Brasília (UNICEUB)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
title |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
spellingShingle |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? Mattiuzzo, Marcela Law; Constitutional Law; Regulatory Policy; Public Policy Algorithms; Automated decisions; Decision-making; Human rights; Fundamental rights; Human dignity |
title_short |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
title_full |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
title_fullStr |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
title_full_unstemmed |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
title_sort |
“Let the algorithm decide”: is human dignity at stake? |
author |
Mattiuzzo, Marcela |
author_facet |
Mattiuzzo, Marcela |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mattiuzzo, Marcela |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Law; Constitutional Law; Regulatory Policy; Public Policy Algorithms; Automated decisions; Decision-making; Human rights; Fundamental rights; Human dignity |
topic |
Law; Constitutional Law; Regulatory Policy; Public Policy Algorithms; Automated decisions; Decision-making; Human rights; Fundamental rights; Human dignity |
description |
The goal of this article is to argue that the debate regarding algorithmic decision-making and its impact on fundamental rights is not well-addressed and should be reframed in order to allow for adequate regulatory policies regarding recent technological developments in automation. A review of the literature on algorithms and an analysis of Articles 6, IX and 20 of the Brazilian Federal Law n° 13.709/2018 (LGPD) lead to the conclusion that claims that algorithmic decisions are unlawful because of profiling or because they replace human analysis are imprecise and do not identify the real issues at hand. Profiles are nothing more than generalizations, largely accepted in legal systems, and there are many kinds of decisions based on generalizations which algorithms can adequately make with no human intervention. In this context, this article restates the debate about automated decisions and fundamental rights focusing on two main obstacles: (i) the potential for discrimination by algorithmic systems and (ii) accountability of their decision-making processes. Lastly, the arguments put forward are applied to the current case of the covid-19 pandemic to illustrate the challenges ahead. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-04-02 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/6784 10.5102/rbpp.v11i1.6784 |
url |
https://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/6784 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5102/rbpp.v11i1.6784 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/6784/pdf |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2021 Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2021 Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UniCEUB |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UniCEUB |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Public Policy; v. 11, n. 1 (2021) Revista Brasileña de Políticas Públicas; v. 11, n. 1 (2021) Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas; v. 11, n. 1 (2021) 2236-1677 2179-8338 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) instname:Centro de Ensino de Brasília (UNICEUB) instacron:UNICEUB |
instname_str |
Centro de Ensino de Brasília (UNICEUB) |
instacron_str |
UNICEUB |
institution |
UNICEUB |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online) - Centro de Ensino de Brasília (UNICEUB) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
atendimento.seer@uniceub.br||rbppuniceub@gmail.com|| prisqua@gmail.com|| marcelodvarella@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1798328491692785664 |