Content deleted Content added
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: author-link1, doi-access, url, title, template type. URLs might have been anonymized. Add: newspaper, ssrn. Removed proxy/dead URL that duplicated identifier. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | #UCB_CommandLine |
m Open access bot: hdl updated in citation with #oabot. |
||
Line 166:
The contributors of the 2019 documentary [[iHuman (2019 film)|iHuman]] expressed apprehension of "infinitely stable dictatorships" created by government AI.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Wilkinson |first1=Amber |title='iHuman': IDFA Review |url=https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/ihuman-idfa-review/5144918.article |website=Screen |access-date=21 April 2020}}</ref>
Due to public criticism, the Australian government announced the suspension of [[Robodebt scheme]] key functions in 2019, and a review of all debts raised using the programme.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rinta-Kahila |first1=Tapani |last2=Someh |first2=Ida |last3=Gillespie |first3=Nicole |last4=Indulska |first4=Marta |last5=Gregor |first5=Shirley |title=Algorithmic decision-making and system destructiveness: A case of automatic debt recovery |journal=European Journal of Information Systems |date=4 May 2022 |volume=31 |issue=3 |pages=313–338 |doi=10.1080/0960085X.2021.1960905|s2cid=239735326 |doi-access=free |hdl=1885/294609 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>
In 2020, algorithms assigning exam grades to students in the [[2020 UK GCSE and A-Level grading controversy|UK sparked open protest]] under the banner "Fuck the algorithm."<ref name="fuckthealgorithm" /> This protest was successful and the grades were taken back.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Reuter |first1=Markus |title=Fuck the Algorithm - Jugendproteste in Großbritannien gegen maschinelle Notenvergabe erfolgreich |url=https://netzpolitik.org/2020/fuck-the-algorithm-jugendproteste-in-grossbritannien-gegen-maschinelle-notenvergabe-erfolgreich/ |access-date=3 October 2020 |work=netzpolitik.org |date=17 August 2020 |language=de-DE}}</ref>
Line 203:
|}
Researchers found some evidence that when citizens perceive their political leaders or security providers to be untrustworthy, disappointing, or immoral, they prefer to replace them by artificial agents, whom they consider to be more reliable.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Spatola |first1=Nicolas |last2=Macdorman |first2=Karl F. |title=Why Real Citizens Would Turn to Artificial Leaders |journal=Digital Government: Research and Practice |date=11 July 2021 |volume=2 |issue=3 |pages=26:1–26:24 |doi=10.1145/3447954 |issn=2691-199X|doi-access=free |hdl=1805/30988 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> The evidence is established by survey experiments on university students of all genders.
==In popular culture==
| |||