Data Rules: Reinventing the Market Economy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Cristina Alaimo and Jannis Kallinikos: “Digital data have become the critical frontier where emerging economic practices and organizational forms confront the traditional economic order and its institutions. In Data Rules, Cristina Alaimo and Jannis Kallinikos establish a social science framework for analyzing the unprecedented social and economic restructuring brought about by data. Working at the intersection of information systems and organizational studies, they draw extensively on intellectual currents in sociology, semiotics, cognitive science and technology, and social theory. Making the case for turning “data-making” into an area of inquiry of its own, the authors uncover how data are deeply implicated in rewiring the institutions of the market economy.

The authors associate digital data with the decentering of organizations. As they point out, centered systems make sense only when firms (and formal organizations more broadly) can keep the external world at arm’s length and maintain a relative operation independence from it. These patterns no longer hold. Data transform the production of goods and services to an endless series of exchanges and interactions that defeat the functional logics of markets and organizations. The diffusion of platforms and ecosystems is indicative of these broader transformations. Rather than viewing data as simply a force of surveillance and control, the authors place the transformative potential of data at the center of an emerging socioeconomic order that restructures society and its institutions…(More)”.

Global AI governance: barriers and pathways forward 

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Huw Roberts, Emmie Hine, Mariarosaria Taddeo, Luciano Floridi: “This policy paper is a response to the growing calls for ambitious new international institutions for AI. It maps the geopolitical and institutional barriers to stronger global AI governance and considers potential pathways forward in light of these constraints. We argue that a promising foundation of international regimes focused on AI governance is emerging, but the centrality of AI to interstate competition, dysfunctional international institutions and disagreement over policy priorities problematizes substantive cooperation. We propose strengthening the existing weak ‘regime complex’ of international institutions as the most desirable and realistic path forward for global AI governance. Strengthening coordination between, and the capacities of, existing institutions supports mutually reinforcing policy change, which, if enacted properly, can lead to catalytic change across the various policy areas where AI has an impact. It also facilitates the flexible governance needed for rapidly evolving technologies.

To make this argument, we outline key global AI governance processes in the next section. In the third section, we analyse how first- and second-order cooperation problems in international relations apply to AI. In the fourth section we assess potential routes for advancing global AI governance, and we conclude by providing recommendations on how to strengthen the weak AI regime complex…(More)”.

Citizen scientists—practices, observations, and experience

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Michael O’Grady & Eleni Mangina: “Citizen science has been studied intensively in recent years. Nonetheless, the voice of citizen scientists is often lost despite their altruistic and indispensable role. To remedy this deficiency, a survey on the overall experiences of citizen scientists was undertaken. Dimensions investigated include activities, open science concepts, and data practices. However, the study prioritizes knowledge and practices of data and data management. When a broad understanding of data is lacking, the ability to make informed decisions about consent and data sharing, for example, is compromised. Furthermore, the potential and impact of individual endeavors and collaborative projects are reduced. Findings indicate that understanding of data management principles is limited. Furthermore, an unawareness of common data and open science concepts was observed. It is concluded that appropriate training and a raised awareness of Responsible Research and Innovation concepts would benefit individual citizen scientists, their projects, and society…(More)”.

Mechanisms for Researcher Access to Online Platform Data

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Status Report by the EU/USA: “Academic and civil society research on prominent online platforms has become a crucial way to understand the information environment and its impact on our societies. Scholars across the globe have leveraged application programming interfaces (APIs) and web crawlers to collect public user-generated content and advertising content on online platforms to study societal issues ranging from technology-facilitated gender-based violence, to the impact of media on mental health for children and youth. Yet, a changing landscape of platforms’ data access mechanisms and policies has created uncertainty and difficulty for critical research projects.


The United States and the European Union have a shared commitment to advance data access for researchers, in line with the high-level principles on access to data from online platforms for researchers announced at the EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council (TTC) Ministerial Meeting in May 2023.1 Since the launch of the TTC, the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) has gone into effect, requiring providers of Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs) to provide increased transparency into their services. The DSA includes provisions on transparency reports, terms and conditions, and explanations for content moderation decisions. Among those, two provisions provide important access to publicly available content on platforms:


• DSA Article 40.12 requires providers of VLOPs/VLOSEs to provide academic and civil society researchers with data that is “publicly accessible in their online interface.”
• DSA Article 39 requires providers of VLOPs/VLOSEs to maintain a public repository of advertisements.

The announcements related to new researcher access mechanisms mark an important development and opportunity to better understand the information environment. This status report summarizes a subset of mechanisms that are available to European and/or United States researchers today, following, in part VLOPs and VLOSEs measures to comply with the DSA. The report aims at showcasing the existing access modalities and encouraging the use of these mechanisms to study the impact of online platform’s design and decisions on society. The list of mechanisms reviewed is included in the Appendix…(More)”

Human-Centered AI

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book edited by Catherine Régis, Jean-Louis Denis, Maria Luciana Axente, and Atsuo Kishimoto: “Artificial intelligence (AI) permeates our lives in a growing number of ways. Relying solely on traditional, technology-driven approaches won’t suffice to develop and deploy that technology in a way that truly enhances human experience. A new concept is desperately needed to reach that goal. That concept is Human-Centered AI (HCAI).

With 29 captivating chapters, this book delves deep into the realm of HCAI. In Section I, it demystifies HCAI, exploring cutting-edge trends and approaches in its study, including the moral landscape of Large Language Models. Section II looks at how HCAI is viewed in different institutions—like the justice system, health system, and higher education—and how it could affect them. It examines how crafting HCAI could lead to better work. Section III offers practical insights and successful strategies to transform HCAI from theory to reality, for example, studying how using regulatory sandboxes could ensure the development of age-appropriate AI for kids. Finally, decision-makers and practitioners provide invaluable perspectives throughout the book, showcasing the real-world significance of its articles beyond academia.

Authored by experts from a variety of backgrounds, sectors, disciplines, and countries, this engaging book offers a fascinating exploration of Human-Centered AI. Whether you’re new to the subject or not, a decision-maker, a practitioner or simply an AI user, this book will help you gain a better understanding of HCAI’s impact on our societies, and of why and how AI should really be developed and deployed in a human-centered future…(More)”.

DC launched an AI tool for navigating the city’s open data

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Kaela Roeder: “In a move echoing local governments’ increasing attention toward generative artificial intelligence across the country, the nation’s capital now aims to make navigating its open data easier through a new public beta pilot.

DC Compass, launched in March, uses generative AI to answer user questions and create maps from open data sets, ranging from the district’s population to what different trees are planted in the city. The Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO) partnered with the geographic information system (GIS) technology company Esri, which has an office in Vienna, Virginia, to create the new tool.

This debut follows Mayor Muriel Bowser’s signing of DC’s AI Values and Strategic Plan in February. The order requires agencies to assess if using AI is in alignment with the values it sets forth, including that there’s a clear benefit to people; a plan for “meaningful accountability” for the tool; and transparency, sustainability, privacy and equity at the forefront of deployment.

These values are key when launching something like DC Compass, said Michael Rupert, the interim chief technology officer for digital services at the Office of the Chief Technology Officer.

“The way Mayor Bowser rolled out the mayor’s order and this value statement, I think gives residents and businesses a little more comfort that we aren’t just writing a check and seeing what happens,” Rupert said. “That we’re actually methodically going about it in a responsible way, both morally and fiscally.”..(More)”.

Screenshot of AI portal with black text and data tables over white background

DC COMPASS IN ACTION. (SCREENSHOT/COURTESY OCTO)

The Potential of Artificial Intelligence for the SDGs and Official Statistics

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Paris21: “Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its impact on people’s lives is growing rapidly. AI is already leading to significant developments from healthcare to education, which can contribute to the efficient monitoring and achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a call to action to address the world’s greatest challenges. AI is also raising concerns because, if not addressed carefully, its risks may outweigh its benefits. As a result, AI is garnering increasing attention from National Statistical Offices (NSOs) and the official statistics community as they are challenged to produce more, comprehensive, timely, and highquality data for decision-making with limited resources in a rapidly changing world of data and technologies and in light of complex and converging global issues from pandemics to climate change. This paper has been prepared as an input to the “Data and AI for Sustainable Development: Building a Smarter Future” Conference, organized in partnership with The Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century (PARIS21), the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Building on case studies that examine the use of AI by NSOs, the paper presents the benefits and risks of AI with a focus on NSO operations related to sustainable development. The objective is to spark discussions and to initiate a dialogue around how AI can be leveraged to inform decisions and take action to better monitor and achieve sustainable development, while mitigating its risks…(More)”.

Counting Feminicide: Data Feminism in Action

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Catherine D’Ignazio: “What isn’t counted doesn’t count. And mainstream institutions systematically fail to account for feminicide, the gender-related killing of women and girls, including cisgender and transgender women. Against this failure, Counting Feminicide brings to the fore the work of data activists across the Americas who are documenting such murders—and challenging the reigning logic of data science by centering care, memory, and justice in their work. Drawing on Data Against Feminicide, a large-scale collaborative research project, Catherine D’Ignazio describes the creative, intellectual, and emotional labor of feminicide data activists who are at the forefront of a data ethics that rigorously and consistently takes power and people into account.

Individuals, researchers, and journalists—these data activists scour news sources to assemble spreadsheets and databases of women killed by gender-related violence, then circulate those data in a variety of creative and political forms. Their work reveals the potential of restorative/transformative data science—the use of systematic information to, first, heal communities from the violence and trauma produced by structural inequality and, second, envision and work toward the world in which such violence has been eliminated. Specifically, D’Ignazio explores the possibilities and limitations of counting and quantification—reducing complex social phenomena to convenient, sortable, aggregable forms—when the goal is nothing short of the elimination of gender-related violence.

Counting Feminicide showcases the incredible power of data feminism in practice, in which each murdered woman or girl counts, and, in being counted, joins a collective demand for the restoration of rights and a transformation of the gendered order of the world…(More)”.

Generative AI in Journalism

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Nicholas Diakopoulos et al: “The introduction of ChatGPT by OpenAI in late 2022 captured the imagination of the public—and the news industry—with the potential of generative AI to upend how people create and consume media. Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that can create new content, such as text, images, audio, video, or other media, based on the data it has been trained on and according to written prompts provided by users. ChatGPT is the chat-based user interface that made the power and potential of generative AI salient to a wide audience, reaching 100 million users within two months of its launch.

Although similar technology had been around, by late 2022 it was suddenly working, spurring its integration into various products and presenting not only a host of opportunities for productivity and new experiences but also some serious concerns about accuracy, provenance and attribution of source information, and the increased potential for creating misinformation.

This report serves as a snapshot of how the news industry has grappled with the initial promises and challenges of generative AI towards the end of 2023. The sample of participants reflects how some of the more savvy and experienced members of the profession are reacting to the technology.

Based on participants’ responses, they found that generative AI is already changing work structure and organization, even as it triggers ethical concerns around use. Here are some key takeaways:

  • Applications in News Production. The most predominant current use cases for generative AI include various forms of textual content production, information gathering and sensemaking, multimedia content production, and business uses.
  • Changing Work Structure and Organization. There are a host of new roles emerging to grapple with the changes introduced by generative AI including for leadership, editorial, product, legal, and engineering positions.
  • Work Redesign. There is an unmet opportunity to design new interfaces to support journalistic work with generative AI, in particular to enable the human oversight needed for the efficient and confident checking and verification of outputs..(More)”

How Copyright May Destroy Our Access To The World’s Academic Knowledge

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Glyn Moody: “The shift from analogue to digital has had a massive impact on most aspects of life. One area where that shift has the potential for huge benefits is in the world of academic publishing. Academic papers are costly to publish and distribute on paper, but in a digital format they can be shared globally for almost no cost. That’s one of the driving forces behind the open access movement. But as Walled Culture has reported, resistance from the traditional publishing world has slowed the shift to open access, and undercut the benefits that could flow from it.

That in itself is bad news, but new research from Martin Paul Eve (available as open access) shows that the way the shift to digital has been managed by publishers brings with it a new problem. For all their flaws, analogue publications have the great virtue that they are durable: once a library has a copy, it is likely to be available for decades, if not centuries. Digital scholarly articles come with no such guarantee. The Internet is constantly in flux, with many publishers and sites closing down each year, often without notice. That’s a problem when sites holding archival copies of scholarly articles vanish, making it harder, perhaps impossible, to access important papers. Eve explored whether publishers were placing copies of the articles they published in key archives. Ideally, digital papers would be available in multiple archives to ensure resilience, but the reality is that very few publishers did this. Ars Technica has a good summary of Eve’s results:

When Eve broke down the results by publisher, less than 1 percent of the 204 publishers had put the majority of their content into multiple archives. (The cutoff was 75 percent of their content in three or more archives.) Fewer than 10 percent had put more than half their content in at least two archives. And a full third seemed to be doing no organized archiving at all.

At the individual publication level, under 60 percent were present in at least one archive, and over a quarter didn’t appear to be in any of the archives at all. (Another 14 percent were published too recently to have been archived or had incomplete records.)..(More)”.