Democratizing AI (Part I) - How to ensure human autonomy over our computational “screens, scenes, and unseens.”

by Richard Whitt, Senior Fellow

Digital assistants such as Alexa and Siri and Google Assistant can be quite helpful — but their actual allegiance is to Amazon and Apple and Google, not to the ordinary people who use them. By introducing AI-based digital agents that truly represent and advocate for us as individuals, rather than corporate or government institutions, we can make the Web a more trustworthy and accountable place.

In the 2004 film “I Robot,” Will Smith’s character, the enigmatic Detective Del Spooner, harbors an animosity toward the humanoid-like robots operating in his society. Over the course of the film we learn why. While Spooner once was driving his car on a rainy street, a crash sent his vehicle and another careening into a torrential river. A rescue robot was deployed to pull Spooner and his car to safety, but Spooner implored it to instead retrieve a young girl still alive in the other car.

The rescue robot doesn’t listen. It turns out this artificial intelligence was programmed to rescue humans with the best chances of survival — and since Spooner’s odds were deemed better (45 percent to 11 percent), he was the one chosen to be saved. The 12-year-old girl perishes. As Spooner bitterly put it later, “Eleven percent is more than enough. Human being would have known that.”

Parts of “I, Robot” remain sci-fi lore, like AI first responders with physical bodies. But the ubiquity of AI is no longer fiction. Today, artificial intelligence powers search engines, social media platforms, smart speakers, drones, and much more. The ethical conundra presented in “I, Robot” no longer are fiction, either: AI algorithms now do everything from curating journalism, to diagnosing our health, to determining who gets a loan, or a job, or parole. Think of these AIs as incredibly advanced, and hugely impactful, selection engines.

Ceding any kind of human decision-making to machines is ethically complex territory. This is especially the case when the machines are proverbial “black boxes,” allowing little transparency into the ways they are programmed. Who gets to decide who designs and builds the algorithms, and what data they’re trained with, are deep questions without easy answers. And today, there’s a complication making this complex realm even more problematic: The AIs embedded in and shaping our everyday lives typically are beholden to the priorities and control of large institutions — not to the “end user.”

Device-embedded AIs like Alexa and Siri can be useful, and even delightful. They’re impressive feats of engineering, too. But it’s important to recognize that their real allegiance is to Amazon and Google, not the individual person. As a result, the tech giants of Silicon Valley and elsewhere have their virtual agents perched in our living rooms, and embedded within our phones and laptops, constantly vying for our attention, our data, and our money.

We already can see the consequences of this dynamic, from privacy breaches to technology addiction to the spread of misinformation. As AIs become more advanced, and make more decisions for us and about us, what will these problems look like on a larger scale? And is there a way to prevent them?

Read the rest at

Detain/Release: Simulating Algorithmic Risk Assessments at Pretrial

Keith Porcaro, Adjunct Professor, Criminal Justice Technology, Policy, & Law

To date, the debate surrounding pretrial algorithmic risk assessment tools has focused on statistical quality and overall legality. In 2017, when Jason Tasheaand I first taught our Georgetown Law students about risk assessments, our lesson summarized those debates in a lecture and discussion. Afterwards, we worried that students were taking away a simple, wrong lesson: if a software tool is sufficiently “accurate”, it will solve the problem presented and it does not require further investigation.

The discussion shouldn’t end there. Software has framing power: the mere presence of a risk assessment tool can reframe a judge’s decision-making process and induce new biases, regardless of the tool’s quality. This past fall, we wanted our students to engage with this broader, ecosystem-level issue, and to understand the far-reaching consequences that pretrial detention can have on defendants.

This reflects the overall goals of our practicum class, Criminal Justice Technology, Policy, and Law. We want our students to not just be familiar with technology, but be able to think critically about how software and data-driven tools can influence legal ecosystems — sometimes in unexpected ways. After all, law students aren’t training to be programmers or data scientists: they’re training to be advocates. Legal education needs to equip law students to analyze novel technologies in context, and build arguments for or against them.

So, we built a simulation. We call it Detain/Release.

Continue reading on Medium.

Preserving Our Future: The Importance of Digital Preservation

Joshua Fitterman
Class of 2019

How will a 22nd century historian understand our society? We will have provided this researcher with stacks of tweets, blog posts, email, and assorted digital media giving them access to our thoughts, fears, and artfully-filtered brunch dishes. But despite the robustness of our modern-day digital footprint, many would be surprised to find our intellectual heritage is in a more perilous place than ever before.

Throughout human history, civilization has suffered massive losses of knowledge. The library at Alexandria, constructed by Ptolemy in the 5th century BCE, had the greatest accumulation of knowledge in the ancient world. It was destroyed three times, each time taking with it untold intellectual riches of the ancient world. In the 14th century the great Library of Baghdad, the jewel of the medieval world and custodian of much of the classical and Islamic knowledge fundamental to modern science, philosophy, and politics, was destroyed by the Mongols. So many manuscripts were destroyed survivors claimed it made the Tigris run black with ink.

 While modern data might be safe and secure from the pillaging hoards, it faces threats intrinsic to its existence on digital media. Current archives face environmental challenges ranging from improper storage, which leads to the gradual breakdown of storage media, to natural disasters destroying storage facilities in just a few hours. They also must ensure the readability of digital documents by combatting bit rot, or the natural breakdown of the language dictating the function of a given computer program. However, the greatest obstacle to the preservation of digital objects is the fact that as technology progresses, the technologies needed to read older digital storage media become replaced and those objects become functionally unreadable.

Think about that symbol of knowledge accessibility in most of our pockets right now. Our smartphones provide access to a world of information and store some of the most meaningful parts of our lives. Will we retain access to those life-changing conversations and meaningful photos in 5 years? What about 20 years? Likely not, which is why digital preservation can be so complicated. While many might feel their information is safe in “the Cloud,” these systems too require high degrees of maintenance and data migration to updated storage formats to remain accessible.

This summer, I researched policy strategies to promote digital preservation as part of a fellowship with Georgetown Law’s Institute for Technology Law & Policy. During the course of my research I have had the chance to take a close look at the Federal Government’s preservation efforts. This research ranged from scouring regulations promoting digital preservation to discussions with library science professionals. I have also had the chance to speak with archivists working to preserve Congressional materials, and National Archives professionals, trying to understand exactly how the Federal Government preserves its digital material.

One clear takeaway is the essential role the National Archives and Records Agency (NARA) plays in the preservation of the Government’s digital objects. NARA has policies in place governing the upkeep and transfer of digital objects from federal agencies to NARA’s care, and specialized technology (utilizing the “PREMIS” formatting standards) that is designed to keep records accessible even if the popular commercial programs used to access files change over time.

Nevertheless, important challenges remain. One great concern is the lack of systematic, enforceable policies governing the format by which digital documents from Congress and federal agencies must be transferred to the National Archives. While NARA mandates a minimum standard for formats used, in practice many agencies send documents without the qualities required for files to be well maintained and secure.

Government material is vitally important to preserve for several reasons. In a system built on precedent, the preservation of previous government actions provides, in many cases, a justification for both those inside and outside of government to choose how to proceed. For example, lawyers advising clients on regulatory compliance can look at past actions, guidances, and even public discussions of a given topic to gauge how administrators understand various issues. While many of these documents are supposed to be preserved, the way in which they are preserved tends to be inconsistent across agencies, leading to fears that some of the file formats used might not retain necessary information. Adding to this challenge, a newly released White House recommendation sets a 2022 date for the transition of all Federal documents to digital formats. This will compound the burden on technical professionals administering the National Archives’ systems. Many individuals from NARA believe it does not have the staff required to keep up with the growing libraries of digital objects they must maintain.

In Congress, the records of actions leading to the passage of a bill are of vital importance for legal professionals and the courts to ascertain the intent of a bill’s language. Moreover, the story of how congressional offices interact is important to historians for understanding a particular moment in the government's history, or gaining a unique perspective on a period in history generally. While in previous generations this might have been made simpler by the existence of paper documents, there is a growing use of digital formatted correspondence and communication by these offices. However, due to the administrative structure of Congress, currently no formal digital preservation requirements exist outside of maintaining correspondence records. Thus many of these records might not be properly preserved.

Like most things taken for granted, digital preservation rarely receives the attention it deserves. The life of our digitally-created and stored heritage only becomes more important with each passing day. Maybe we cannot save all of the documents preserving the history created at this moment, but trying to save as much as possible is of the utmost importance. We do not know what study, datum, tweet, or email may come to represent a historical turning point or important lesson. A comprehensive approach towards the preservation of our digital documents, and the funding necessary to maintain those archives, can only serve the best interests of our civilization.

Sometimes, the security of our current moment tends to obscure the lessons of history. One of the most important lessons of history is that societies without a well-maintained history do not progress. We need to think seriously now about preserving the advancements of the past century for the future, much of which is contained on digital media. Lack of access to this knowledge, whether by destruction or obsolescence, has the same inevitable result--a darker future for our children.

How the Open Data Movement Can Realize Its Potential

How the Open Data Movement Can Realize Its Potential

The last decade has seen a lot of discussion and activity around the democratic and economic potential in government standardizing or publishing its information as open data. Politicians from across the spectrum have extolled the accountability benefits of open data, passing legislation and issuing executive orders. And organizations have pushed the benefits of open data as a key ingredient for government to innovate in performing its missions. While the open data movement has achieved some significant successes – from the DATA Actto – we have not come close to living up to the potential or even the current rhetoric. 

An IP Framework for 3D Bio-Printing: Problems and Opportunities

An IP Framework for 3D Bio-Printing: Problems and Opportunities

Jason Goldfarb
Georgetown Law, Class of 2017

3D printing presents myriad opportunities across many industries to produce goods quickly and efficiently. The biomedical industry in particular presents enormous potential. Companies in the field have already demonstrated that they are capable of using bio-ink to produce biological implants and tissues. In the future, they will likely be able to print fully functional organs.

The benefits of such technology are obvious: those in need of new organs will not have to spend eons on a waiting list until a matching organ is available for transplant; those with weak organs could have specific components repaired or replaced without having to undergo a full transplant or extensive drug therapy; research can be more widespread as access to biological material expands. 

The companies pioneering the space in the United States rely heavily on the existing intellectual property (IP) law framework to safeguard their technology. However, there are a number of potential problems that could make it difficult for the existing framework to safeguard the proprietary elements of the technology while still enabling the industry to grow.