Schrödinger’s Robot: Privacy in Uncertain States

Theoretical Inquiries in Law 20 (1):123-154 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Can robots or AIs operating independently of human intervention or oversight diminish our privacy? There are two equal and opposite reactions to this issue. On the robot side, machines are starting to outperform human experts in an increasing array of narrow tasks, including driving, surgery, and medical diagnostics. This is fueling a growing optimism that robots and AIs will exceed humans more generally and spectacularly; some think, to the point where we will have to consider their moral and legal status. On the privacy side, one sees the very opposite: robots and AIs are, in a legal sense, nothing. The received view is that since robots and AIs are neither sentient nor capable of human-level cognition, they are of no consequence to privacy law. This article argues that robots and AIs operating independently of human intervention can and, in some cases, already do diminish our privacy. Epistemic privacy offers a useful analytic framework for understanding the kind of cognizance that gives rise to diminished privacy. Because machines can actuate on the basis of the beliefs they form in ways that affect people’s life chances and opportunities, I argue that they demonstrate the kind of cognizance that definitively implicates privacy. Consequently, I conclude that legal theory and doctrine will have to expand their understanding of privacy relationships to include robots and AIs that meet these epistemic conditions. An increasing number of machines possess epistemic qualities that force us to rethink our understanding of privacy relationships with robots and AIs.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,829

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

An Intrusion Theory of Privacy.George E. Panichas - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (2):145-161.
The Epistemic Account of Privacy.Martijn Blaauw - 2013 - Episteme 10 (2):167-177.
New Ways of Thinking about Privacy.B. Roessler - 2006 - In Anne Philips Bonnie Honig & John Dryzek (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. Oxford University Press. pp. 694-713.
On the need for a right to cognitive privacy.Kyle Slominski - 2018 - Oxford Philosophical Society Annual Review 40:43-45.
Privacy as an Asset.Jarek Gryz - 2017 - In Marcellus Mindel, Kelly Lyons & Joe Wigglesworth (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th CASCON Conference. Markham, Canada: IBM/ACM. pp. 266-271.
The Right to Privacy.Lloyd L. Weinreb - 2000 - Social Philosophy and Policy 17 (2):25.
Privacy, Intimacy, and Isolation.Julie C. Inness - 1992 - New York, US: OUP Usa.
A Framework for Analyzing and Comparing Privacy States.Alan Rubel & Ryan Biava - 2014 - JASIST: The Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 65 (12):2422-2431.
Is there a right to privacy?Steven Davis - 2009 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (4):450-475.
The Value of Privacy in a Deliberative Democracy.Thomas James Sullivan - 2003 - Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
Privacy, Interests, and Inalienable Rights.Adam D. Moore - 2018 - Moral Philosophy and Politics 5 (2):327-355.
The Right to Privacy*: LLOYD L. WEINREB.Lloyd L. Weinreb - 2000 - Social Philosophy and Policy 17 (2):25-44.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-03-30

Downloads
9 (#1,252,744)

6 months
2 (#1,196,523)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ian R. Kerr
Last affiliation: University of Ottawa

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references