When machine-learning algorithms are deployed in high-stakes decisions, we want to ensure that their deployment leads to fair and equitable outcomes. This concern has motivated a fast-growing literature that focuses on diagnosing and addressing disparities in machine predictions. However, many machine predictions are deployed to assist in decisions where a human decision-maker retains the ultimate decision authority. In this article, we therefore consider how properties of machine predictions affect the resulting human decisions. We show in a formal model that the inclusion of a biased human decision-maker can revert common relationships between the structure of the algorithm and the qualities of resulting decisions. Specifically, we document that excluding information about protected groups from the prediction may fail to reduce, and may even increase, ultimate disparities. While our concrete results rely on specific assumptions about the data, algorithm, and decision-maker, they show more broadly that any study of critical properties of complex decision systems, such as the fairness of machine-assisted human decisions, should go beyond focusing on the underlying algorithmic predictions in isolation.

As exciting as all this might seem, this decision seems to be more of an aberration than the rule. Before it was finally granted a patent in South Africa, the DABUS application had been rejected by patent offices in the US, Europe and the UK. The European Patent Office (EPO), justifying its decision to reject the patent application, pointed out that the law designates a natural person as the inventor of a work in order to preserve her moral right over the invention as well as to secure for her the economic rights made available by the patent. In order to be entitled to these benefits, an inventor needs to have actually "performed the creative act of invention". While artificial intelligence algorithms today are capable of perform complex computational functions that are often way beyond the capability of humans, the EPO pointed out that in all these instances, the programs are doing little more than just following the broad instructions of the humans who designed them.

At the seventy-sixth session of the United Nations General Assembly, which recently concluded in New York City, US President Joe Biden urged world leaders to focus on "shaping the rules of the world on vital issues like trade, cyber, and emerging technologies." In addressing the same body that adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in the wake of World War II, he asked, "Will we apply and strengthen the core tenets of [the] international system, including the U.N. Charter and the [UDHR], as we seek to shape the emergence of new technologies and deter new threats?" Biden's focus on emerging technologies is particularly pertinent given the speed with which new and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) are reshaping our world and our lives, far outpacing our ability to understand their implications for fundamental rights and freedoms -- a trend further accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden's remarks came on the heels of a new report published by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, outlining the human rights risks and implications of the widespread use of AI by governments and businesses alike. The report reviews the international human rights legal framework applicable to AI technologies, highlights specific risks in four key sectors (law enforcement, national security, criminal justice and border management; public services; employment; and content moderation) and offers recommendations to mitigate these risks.

Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com. A suspended Virginia Tech linebacker accused in the fatal beating of a Tinder match has been indicted on a charge of second-degree murder. Isimemen Etute, 18, who is accused in the death of 40-year-old Jerry Smith in May, was indicted by a grand jury Tuesday, The Roanoke Times reported. A hearing is scheduled Nov. 18.

The statute prohibits the circumvention of software copy protection and has been the target of right to repair advocates for years. As one example, it adopts a recommendation from Public Knowledge and iFixit that involves video game consoles. It says "the repair of software-enabled consumer devices is likely to be fair use, the Register finds that certain video game console repair is also likely fair use." It notes consumers can access the firmware on their systems as long as it's with the intention of fixing the device's optical drive and they restore any protective measures afterward. The rulemaking stops short of protecting non-consumer devices.

Algorithms now determine how much things cost. It's called dynamic pricing and it adjusts according to current market conditions in order to increase profits. The rise of e-commerce has propelled pricing algorithms into an everyday occurrence--whether you're shopping on Amazon, booking a flight, hotel or ordering an Uber. In this continuation of our series on automation and your wallet, we explore what happens when a machine determines the price you pay. This episode was reported by Anthony Green and produced by Jennifer Strong and Emma Cillekens. We're edited by Mat Honan and our mix engineer is Garret Lang, with sound design and music by Jacob Gorski. Jennifer: Alright so I'm in an airport just outside New York City and just looking at the departures board here seeing all these flights going different places… It makes me think about how we decide how much something should cost… like a ticket for one of these flights. Because where the plane is going is just part of the puzzle. The price of airfare is highly personalized.

At a recent conference on the challenges of artificial intelligence, Christof Koch made clear in his remarks that the stakes were high: "By mid-century, humanity will be surrounded by ubiquitous, flexible, highly intelligent autonomous agents, and this will profoundly affect our future--including whether we have any." Dr. Koch--who is the chief scientist of the Mindscope Program at the Allen Institute for brain science in Seattle--was speaking to a group of roughly a hundred academics, diplomats and journalists. The conference was hosted by the Vatican at the Cancelleria, a 15th-century Renaissance palace in Rome, and centered around the theme of "the challenge of artificial intelligence for human society and the idea of the human person." This was the second event at the Vatican to focus on artificial intelligence, commonly abbreviated as A.I. Just before Italy entered into a nationwide lockdown last year, the Pontifical Academy for Life held a workshop on A.I. in February 2020. This workshop ultimately produced a "Call for AI Ethics," which was signed by Microsoft, IBM, the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations and the Italian government, in addition to the Academy.

In 2017, the National Bureau of Economic Research conducted a large study about age discrimination in hiring that confirms the prevalence of gendered ageism. "Based on evidence from over 40,000 job applications, we find robust evidence of age discrimination in hiring against older women, especially those near retirement age." The call back rate for older women compared to their younger female counterparts was significantly lower despite the fact that the only difference in the resumes was their age. The evaluation of resumes like many other processes in business today is managed by technology, specifically artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems.

This article offers an overview of the main first-order ethical questions raised by robots and Artificial Intelligence (RAIs) under five broad rubrics: functionality, inherent significance, rights and responsibilities, side-effects, and threats. The

While significant differences exist, there is more overlap than one might think. As the U.S. considers its own approach, we may see more agreement and less technological balkanization. In 2018, when the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into force, it was a relatively unique piece of legislation. The two major centers of data-driven innovation and disruption -- the United States and China -- did not have anything comparable. Fast forward to 2021, stakeholders are paying similar attention to the regulation of AI.