Search results

Building on the 2017 Hamburg Statement and the G20 Roadmap for Digitalization, this paper recommends a G20 framework for artificial intelligence in the workplace. It proposes high level principles for such a framework for G-20 governments to enable the smoother, internationally broader and more socially acceptable introduction of big data and AI. The principles are dedicated to the work space. It summarises the main issues behind the framework principles. It also suggests two paths towards adoption of a G-20 framework for artificial intelligence in the workplace.

Market failures are resulting in network operators and device manufacturers not being incentivized to ensure improved cyber security practices in their operations. The result is a large global base of vulnerable computers, modems/routers and Internet of Things devices which can be manipulated by Cyber criminals. Practical recommendations are made as to how governments could address these market failures (with low-cost to government) and significantly improve the health of the cyber ecosystem.

6 Sustainable business: what should it be? Circular economy and the 'business of subversion'7 Peak mining: stepping down from high resource use; SECTION 3 Key aspects of a steady state economy; 8 What is the steady state economy?; 9 The physical pathway to a steady state economy; 10 Relating the steady state economy to the green, circular and blue economies; 11 Sustainable, equitable, secure: getting there?; 12 The Genuine Progress Indicator: an indicator to guide the transition to a steady state economy; 13 Capitalism and the steady state: uneasy bedfellows.

We identify an important feature of current digital governance systems: "third-party funded digital barter": consumers of digital services get many digital services for free (or under- priced) and in return have personal information about themselves collected for free. In addition, the digital consumers receive advertising and other forms of influence from the third parties that fund the digital services. The interests of the third-party funders are not well-aligned with the interests of the digital consumers. This fundamental flaw of current digital governance systems is responsible for an array of serious problems, including inequities, inefficiencies, manipulation of digital consumers, as well as dangers to social cohesion and democracy. We present four policy guidelines that aim to correct this flaw by shifting control of personal data from the data aggregators and their third-party funders to the digital consumers. The proposals cover "official data" that require official authentication, "privy data" that is either generated by the data subjects about themselves or by a second parties, and "collective data." The proposals put each of these data types under the individual or collective control of the data subjects. There are also proposals to mitigate asymmetries of information and market power.

We identify an important feature of current digital governance systems: "third-party funded digital barter": consumers of digital services get many digital services for free (or underpriced) and in return have personal information about themselves collected for free. In addition, the digital consumers receive advertising and other forms of influence from the third parties that fund the digital services. The interests of the third-party funders are not well-aligned with the interests of the digital consumers. This fundamental flaw of current digital governance systems is responsible for an array of serious problems, including inequities, inefficiencies, manipulation of digital consumers, as well as dangers to social cohesion and democracy. We present four policy guidelines that aim to correct this flaw by shifting control of personal data from the data aggregators and their third-party funders to the digital consumers. The proposals cover "official data" that require official authentication, "privy data" that is either generated by the data subjects about themselves or by a second parties, and "collective data." The proposals put each of these data types under the individual or collective control of the data subjects. There are also proposals to mitigate asymmetries of information and market power.

We identify an important feature of current digital governance systems: "third-party funded digital barter": consumers of digital services get many digital services for free (or underpriced) and in return have personal information about themselves collected for free. In addition, the digital consumers receive advertising and other forms of influence from the third parties that fund the digital services. The interests of the third-party funders are not well-aligned with the interests of the digital consumers. This fundamental flaw of current digital governance systems is responsible for an array of serious problems, including inequities, inefficiencies, manipulation of digital consumers, as well as dangers to social cohesion and democracy. We present four policy guidelines that aim to correct this flaw by shifting control of personal data from the data aggregators and their third-party funders to the digital consumers. The proposals cover "official data" that require official authentication, "privy data" that is either generated by the data subjects about themselves or by a second parties, and "collective data." The proposals put each of these data types under the individual or collective control of the data subjects. There are also proposals to mitigate asymmetries of information and market power.