- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

origine sociopolitica di alcune normative in tema trasparenza
by Andrea Trentini May 17, 2023

May 17, 2023

Ciao, sto cercando di indagare scartabellando in rete se si riesce a capire quanta iniziativa "dal basso" (iniziativa popolare, pressione lobbystica, ecc) ha portato a normative come il "Diritto di accesso agli atti amministrativi in Italia" (1990), il FOIA italiano, il CAD. Avete lumi o riferimenti utili? Grazie -- Andrea Trentini ⠠⠵ http://atrent.it public key ID: 0xA7A91E3B Dip.to di Informatica Università degli Studi di Milano

1 0

UNIDIR AI Policy Portal
by Diego.Latella May 15, 2023

May 15, 2023

Penso possa essere di vostro interesse il nuovo portale dell'UNIDIR su _AI policy_, inaugurato oggi. Lo trovate al link https://aipolicyportal.org l'UNIDIR e' lo United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (https://unidir.org ). DL -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://www.isti.cnr.it/People/D.Latella - ph: +390506212982, fax: +390506212040 =================== I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

1 0

Proposal for a sovereign and democratic digitalisation of Europe
by Alessandro Brolpito May 15, 2023

May 15, 2023

Buongiorno, Nel caso non fosse ancora passato in lista, un passo importante su un tema discusso molto in lista Proposal for a sovereign and democratic digitalisation of Europe - Publications Office of the EU (europa.eu) <https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/dae77969-7812-11ec…> buona lettura, Alessandro

1 0

106° Nexa Lunch Seminar | 24 maggio 2023, ore 13.00
by Nexa Media May 15, 2023

May 15, 2023

Gentilissime, gentilissimi, Vi invitiamo a partecipare al *106° Nexa Lunch Seminar *che si terrà *mercoledì 24 maggio*, dalle ore 13.00 alle ore 14.00, con un incontro dal titolo: /*"L'"etica" come specchietto per le allodole. Sistemi di intelligenza artificiale e violazioni dei diritti"*/. Ospite dell'incontro: *Daniela Tafani* (Università di Pisa). _L'incontro si terrà IN PRESENZA e ONLINE._ _SEDE FISICA_ dell'incontro: Centro Nexa su Internet e Società, Politecnico di Torino, Via Boggio 65/a, Torino (1° piano). Per accedere alla sala si raccomanda di suonare al citofono *Portineria* e di seguire le indicazioni segnalate dai cartelli lungo il percorso. QUI <https://nexa.polito.it/contatti> maggiori informazioni su come raggiungerci. _STANZA VIRTUALE _dell'incontro: https://didattica.polito.it/VClass/NexaEvent Di seguito maggiori dettagli: Nexa Center for Internet and Society Newsletter Se non visualizzi correttamente questo messaggio clicca qui <https://nexa.polito.it/lunch-106> NEXA 106° Nexa Lunch Seminar Mercoledì 24 maggio 2023, ore 13.00 - 14.00 https://nexa.polito.it/lunch-106 L’«etica» come specchietto per le allodole. Sistemi di intelligenza artificiale e violazioni dei diritti Speaker: *DANIELA TAFANI* (Università di Pisa) *L'INCONTRO SI TERRÀ IN PRESENZA E ONLINE* *SEDE FISICA*: Centro Nexa su Internet e Società, Politecnico di Torino, Via Boggio 65/a, Torino (1° piano) Suonare al citofono "Portineria" - Seguire le indicazioni segnalate dai cartelli apposti lungo il percorso (Per maggiori informazioni su come raggiungerci clicca QUI <https://nexa.polito.it/contatti>) *STANZA VIRTUALE*: https://didattica.polito.it/VClass/NexaEvent Giudizi e decisioni che hanno effetti rilevanti sulle vite delle persone sono oggi affidati, in un numero crescente di ambiti, a *sistemi di intelligenza artificiale* che non funzionano. Tali malfunzionamenti non sono occasionali e non sono scongiurabili con interventi tecnici: essi rivelano, anzi, il funzionamento ordinario dei sistemi di apprendimento automatico, utilizzati impropriamente per compiti che non è loro possibile svolgere o che sono impossibili tout court. Le *decisioni basate su tali sistemi sono costitutivamente discriminatorie, e dunque, in alcuni ambiti, infallibilmente lesive di diritti giuridicamente tutelati*, in quanto procedono trattando gli individui in base al loro raggruppamento in classi, costituite a partire dalle regolarità rilevate nei dati di partenza. Essendo radicata nella natura statistica di questi sistemi, la caratteristica di dimenticare i «margini» è strutturale: non è accidentale e non è dovuta a singoli bias tecnicamente modificabili. Ci si può trovare ai margini dei modelli algoritmici di normalità in virtù di caratteristiche totalmente irrilevanti, rispetto alle decisioni di cui si è oggetto. Alla vasta documentazione degli esiti ingiusti, nocivi e assurdi di tali decisioni, le grandi aziende tecnologiche – paventando un divieto generalizzato – hanno risposto, in evidente conflitto di interessi, con un discorso sull’etica: è nata così, come operazione di cattura culturale, con l’obiettivo di rendere plausibile un regime di mera autoregolazione, l’*«etica dell’intelligenza artificiale»*. La *funzione di tale discorso è quella di tutelare, legittimandolo, un modello di business* - fondato sulla sorveglianza e sulla possibilità di esternalizzare impunemente i costi del lavoro, degli effetti ambientali e dei danni sociali- *il cui nucleo consiste nella vendita, alle agenzie pubblicitarie, della promessa di un microtargeting fondato sulla profilazione algoritmica*. Negli ultimi anni, l’*opera di demistificazione della natura meramente discorsiva e del carattere strumentale dell’«etica dell’intelligenza artificiale»*, che trasforma l’etica nella questione della conformità procedurale a un «anemico set di strumenti» e standard tecnici, è stata così efficace da indurre molti a liquidare come inutile o dannosa – in quanto disarmata alternativa al diritto o vuota retorica aziendale – l’intera filosofia morale. Al dissolversi della narrazione sull’etica dell’intelligenza artificiale, compare il convitato di pietra che essa aveva lo scopo di tenere alla larga: si sostiene infatti ora, da più parti, l’*urgenza che ad intervenire, in modo drastico, sia il diritto*. L’adozione di sistemi di apprendimento automatico a fini decisionali, in ambiti rilevanti per la vita delle persone, quali il settore giudiziario, educativo o dell’assistenza sociale, equivale infatti alla decisione, in via amministrativa, di istituire delle «zone pressoché prive di diritti umani». BIOGRAFIA - e informazioni supplementari: [Lunch106] *Daniela TAFANI* insegna Etica e politica dell’intelligenza artificiale e Storia della filosofia politica all’Università di Pisa. È vicepresidente della Società italiana di Studi Kantiani e si occupa, nello specifico, della filosofia morale e politica di Kant, e di etica e intelligenza artificiale. Tra i suoi lavori recenti: /What’s wrong with “AI ethics” narratives <https://commentbfp.sp.unipi.it/daniela-tafani-what-s-wrong-with-ai-ethics-n…>/ (“Bollettino telematico di filosofia politica”, 2022); /Automaticamente illegali”. Una proposta per i sistemi di intelligenza artificiale <https://btfp.sp.unipi.it/it/2022/11/automaticamente-illegali-una-proposta-p…>/ (“Bollettino telematico di filosofia politica”, 2022); L’imperativo categorico come algoritmo. Kant e l’etica delle macchine (“Sistemi intelligenti”, 2021), Sulla moralità artificiale. Le decisioni delle macchine tra etica e diritto (“Rivista di filosofia”, 2020). *Letture consigliate e link utili:* * A. Saltelli, D.J. Dankel, M. Di Fiore, N. Holland, M. Pigeon, Science, the endless frontier of regulatory capture, «Futures», CXXXV, 2022, pp. 1-14, LINK <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102860> * Economies of Virtue: The Circulation of ‘Ethics’ in AI, a cura di T. Phan, J. Goldenfein, D. Kuch, M. Mann, Amsterdam, Institute of Network Cultures, 2022, LINK <https://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/economies-of-virtue-the-circul…> * A. Wang, S. Kapoor, S. Barocas, A. Narayanan, Against Predictive Optimization: On the Legitimacy of Decision-Making Algorithms that Optimize Predictive Accuracy, October 4, 2022, pp. 1-29, LINK <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4238015> * M. Giraudo, Legal Bubbles, in Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, a cura di A. Marciano, G.B. Ramello, New York, Springer, 2022, LINK <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357702553> * F. Pasquale e G. Malgieri, From Transparency to Justification: Toward Ex Ante Accountability for AI, «Brussels Privacy Hub Working Papers», VIII, 33, 2022, pp. 1-27, LINK <https://brusselsprivacyhub.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/BPH-Working-Paper…> Che cosa sono il Centro Nexa e i cicli di incontri “Mercoledì di Nexa” e “Nexa Lunch Seminar” <https://www.facebook.com/nexa.center/> <https://twitter.com/nexacenter> <https://www.youtube.com/user/NexaCenter> <https://www.instagram.com/nexa_center/> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3054864/admin/> #nexalunchseminar <https://twitter.com/search?q=%23nexalunchseminar&src=typd> #DanielaTafani <https://twitter.com/DanielaTafani> #UniversitàdiPisa <https://twitter.com/Unipisa> Il Centro Nexa su Internet & Società del Politecnico di Torino (Dipartimento di Automatica e Informatica), fondato nel 2006, è un centro di ricerca interdisciplinare che, in collaborazione con l’Università di Torino (in particolare il Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza), studia le tecnologie digitali e il loro rapporto con la società. Maggiori informazioni all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/about. Durante i “Mercoledì di Nexa”, che si tengono *ogni 2° mercoledì del mese alle ore 17 in punto*, il Centro Nexa su Internet e Società apre le sue porte non solo agli esperti e a tutti coloro i quali lavorano con Internet, ma anche a semplici appassionati e cittadini. Il ciclo di incontri intende approfondire, con un linguaggio preciso ma accessibile, i temi legati alla Rete: “intelligenza artificiale”, reti sociali, software libero, capitalismo della sorveglianza, neutralità della rete, libertà di espressione, privacy, condivisione di file, "big data" e "open data", “smart cities”, e molto altro. Al centro della maggior parte degli incontri un ospite pronto a dialogare con i direttori del Centro Nexa, il Prof. Juan Carlos De Martin del Politecnico di Torino, i Proff. Marco Ricolfi e Maurizio Borghi dell'Università di Torino, lo staff, i Fellows del Centro Nexa e tutti i presenti. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa, incluso un elenco di tutti i “Mercoledì” passati, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi. Le registrazioni degli incontri sono disponibili qui: https://nexa.polito.it/audio-video. Si segnala inoltre che dal maggio 2012 *ogni 4° mercoledì* del mese *dalle ore 13 alle ore 14* il Centro Nexa organizza anche i "*Nexa Lunch Seminar*". Una lista di tutti i “Lunch Seminar” passati è disponibile all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/lunch-seminars. See our events calendar <http://nexa.polito.it/events> if you're curious about future luncheons, discussions, lectures, and conferences not listed in this email. Our events are free and open to the public, unless otherwise noted. Responsabile Comunicazione Centro Nexa su Internet & Società: *Anita Botta*, tel: +39 011 090 7219, Mob: +39 347 131 3903, anita.botta(a)polito.it. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa e i Nexa Lunch Seminar, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/events. Weekly Events Newsletter. Sign up <http://nexa.polito.it/mailing-lists> to receive this newsletter if this email was forwarded to you. To manage your subscription preferences, please click here <https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>. Connect & get involved: Jobs, internships, and more <http://nexa.polito.it/get-involved>. Cordiali saluti, -- Anita Botta Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino – DAUIN Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino web: https://nexa.polito.it/ mail: anita.botta(a)polito.it tel: 011 090 7219

1 0

Github Copilot Litigation
by Giovanni Battista Gallus May 13, 2023

May 13, 2023

The #githubcopilot litigation will proceed, with some dismissed claims. The judge found a "reasonable inference" that Github "intentionally designed the programs to remove Copyright management Information" (CMI)."Defendants subsequently trained these programs to ignore or remove CMI and therefore stop reproducing it. Id. (“As GitHub explains: ‘GitHub Copilot has changed to require a minimum file content.’ . . . Copilot no longer reproduces these types of CMI . . . . It has been altered not to.”) (emphasis in original). Defendants knew that these programs reproduced training data as output.. Plaintiffs thus plead sufficient facts to support a reasonable inference that Defendants intentionally designed the programs to remove CMI from any licensed code they reproduce as output" https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.403220/gov.uscour… Buon weekend a tutte e tutti. GB Gallus -- Avv. Giovanni Battista Gallus Patrocinante in Cassazione LL.M. Master of Laws - Ph.D. ISO/IEC 27001/2013 Lead Auditor Array - Studio Legale Via Castelvì n. 9 09129 Cagliari (Italy) phone +390707966538 fax +390702041360 Piazza San Nazaro in Brolo 15 20121 Milano (Italy) phone +390287075914 fax +391782709429 e-mail gallus(a)array.law PEC g.gallus(a)legalmail.it twitter @gbgallus http://www.array.eu PGP key fingerprint 1278 C257 1372 8307 FD8A B625 502B E542 4123 3AED Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 0

Paris Marx, "Don't listen to the 'godfather of AI'"
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 12, 2023

May 12, 2023

*Don't listen to the 'godfather of AI'** */Geoffrey Hinton is using fantasies to distract us from the real harms of AI// / Paris Marx May 5, 2023 The media’s been captivated this week by the story of Geoffrey Hinton, the supposed “godfather of AI” who left Google to speak more freely about the supposed threat he sees artificial intelligence posing to humanity — and which he ultimately helped to advance. You can see why it’s such an attractive story, but the focus on Hinton and his framing of the problems with AI continues to distract us from the real conversations we should be having that aren’t focused on some imagined future, but on the harms these technologies are causing in the present. For Hinton, the threat of AI is a future problem. It’s not about how AI will increase the power of employers over employees <https://www.businessinsider.com/chatgpt-ai-will-not-take-jobs-create-future…>, how it will be wielded <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/11/robodebt-five-years-…>against <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/welfare-surveillance-sys…>marginalized <https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/human-rights-ai-visa-1.4838778>communities <https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/aug/08/rise-of-the-racist-robot…>, its potential environmental <https://www.wired.com/story/the-generative-ai-search-race-has-a-dirty-secre…>impacts <https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/04/25/data-centers-…>, and other serious concerns that will affect a lot of people outside the circles of wealthy technologists and executives. Instead, Hinton’s focus is on the fantasy that AI is on the cusp of becoming more intelligent than humans, and will then have the capacity to trick and manipulate us into doing its bidding. [...] continua qui: https://www.disconnect.blog/p/dont-listen-to-the-godfather-of-ai

7 19

Re: [nexa] nexa Digest, Vol 169, Issue 26
by Gaetano Chiurazzi May 11, 2023

May 11, 2023

Segnalo a tutti gli amici di Nexa il convegno "*Trasparenza e opacità nella società digitale*", da me organizzato all'Università di Torino per il 22 maggio 2023. In allegato la locandina. Gaetano Chiurazzi Full Professor of Theoretical Philosophy, Department of Philosophy and Education Sciences University of Turin, Italy Director of program, Collège International de Philosophie (Paris) Ex Senior fellow, Polish Institute of Advanced Studies (PIASt), Warsaw http://universitaditorino.academia.edu/GChiurazzi Recent Publications: https://guerini.it/index.php/dynamis.html https://www.sunypress.edu/p-6440-the-experience-of-truth.aspx http://mimesisedizioni.it/attualita-del-possibile.html Journal: http://www.aracneeditrice.it/index.php/rivista.html?col=tr%C3%B3poS Follow me: https://universitaditorino.academia.edu/GChiurazzi

1 0

testo IA Act votato nella commissione del PE
by de petra giulio May 11, 2023

May 11, 2023

Invio in allegato il testo consolidato cosi come votato oggi dalla commissione del PE. Dovrebbe andare in votazione nella sessione del 12/15 giugno.

1 0

‘Godfather of AI’ Geoffrey Hinton quits Google and warns over dangers of machine learning | Google | The Guardian
by Alberto Cammozzo May 11, 2023

May 11, 2023

<https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/may/02/geoffrey-hinton-godfathe…> The man often touted as the godfather of AI has quit Google, citing concerns over the flood of fake information, videos and photos online and the possibility for AI to upend the job market. Dr Geoffrey Hinton, who with two of his students at the University of Toronto built a neural net in 2012, quit Google this week, the New York Times reported. Hinton, 75, said he quit to speak freely about the dangers of AI, and in part regrets his contribution to the field. He was brought on by Google a decade ago to help develop the company’s AI technology. Hinton’s research led the way for current systems like ChatGPT. He told the New York Times that until last year he believed Google had been a “proper steward” of the technology, but that changed once Microsoft started incorporating a chatbot into its Bing search engine, and the company began becoming concerned about the risk to its search business. Some of the dangers of AI chatbots were “quite scary”, he told the BBC, warning they could become more intelligent than humans and could be exploited by “bad actors”. “I’ve come to the conclusion that the kind of intelligence we’re developing is very different from the intelligence we have.” “So it’s as if you had 10,000 people and whenever one person learned something, everybody automatically knew it. And that’s how these chatbots can know so much more than any one person.” Hinton’s concern in the short term is something that has already become a reality – people will not be able to discern what is true any more with AI-generated photos, videos and text flooding the internet. The recent upgrades to image generators such as Midjourney mean people can now produce photo-realistic images – one such image of Pope Frances in a Balenciaga puffer coat went viral in March. Hinton was also concerned that AI will eventually replace jobs like paralegals, personal assistants and other “drudge work”, and potentially more in the future. Google’s chief scientist, Jeff Dean said in a statement that Google appreciated Hinton’s contributions to the company over the past decade. “I’ve deeply enjoyed our many conversations over the years. I’ll miss him, and I wish him well! “As one of the first companies to publish AI Principles, we remain committed to a responsible approach to AI. We’re continually learning to understand emerging risks while also innovating boldly.” It came as IBM CEO Arvind Krishna told Bloomberg that up to 30% of the company’s back-office roles could be replaced by AI and automation within five years. Krishna said hiring in areas such as human resources will be slowed or suspended, and could result in around 7,800 roles being replaced. IBM has a total global workforce of 260,000. The Guardian has sought comment from IBM. Last month, the Guardian was able to bypass a voice authentication system used by Services Australia using an online AI voice synthesiser, throwing into question the viability of voice biometrics for authentication. Toby Walsh, the chief scientist at the University of New South Wales’ AI Institute, said people should be questioning any online media they see now. “When it comes to any digital data you see – audio or video – you have to entertain the idea that someone has spoofed it.”

3 2

The lawyer whose sex trafficking case against Instagram could spell trouble for big tech | Global development | The Guardian
by Alberto Cammozzo May 10, 2023

May 10, 2023

<https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/may/10/lawyer-sex-traff…> On 14 March 2022, Annie McAdams, a personal injury lawyer running a small firm in Houston, Texas, filed a civil action suit on behalf of one of her clients. The plaintiff was a 23-year-old woman, who had endured years of sexual exploitation at the hands of a convicted trafficker. The defendant was one of the most powerful technology companies in the world. Contained within McAdams’s federal suit was a series of allegations that Meta – the owner of Facebook and Instagram, which are used by more than 3 billion people every day – had knowingly created a breeding ground for human trafficking and was actively facilitating the buying and selling of people for sex online. The lawsuit alleges that the company’s products – particularly Instagram – connects vulnerable victims with human traffickers and sex buyers, and provides traffickers with the means to groom those victims. It says that human trafficking victims are regularly posted on Instagram and sold for sex against their will and claims that the company has failed to take adequate steps to stop this. In the court documents, the plaintiff – who we are calling Shawna – says she was 18 when she was first contacted on Instagram by a man she didn’t know. She claims that the man – referred to as RL in the court papers – sent her messages on her public profile and on Instagram’s direct-messaging service and that this campaign of grooming led to her agreeing to meet him in person. Two days after their first meeting, she claims that RL began to sell her to sex buyers on Instagram. She claims that RL posted explicit pictures of her on Instagram along with emojis such as dollar signs, crowns and roses, widely recognised by law enforcement and trafficking experts as indicators of commercial sex adverts. “[Meta Inc] knew that the use of these codes were blatant red flags … and were actually sex trafficking advertisements designed to sell her for sex, but [Meta] did nothing to remove or prevent those repeated posts, despite having the ability to do so,” the court papers say. Shawna alleges that over the course of a year she was sold on Instagram to multiple sex buyers. She says she was threatened with homelessness or violence by RL if she refused to fulfil her “quota” of sex acts. She went on to testify against RL in a federal criminal trial in Texas and he was subsequently sentenced to 40 years for sex trafficking. However, the lawsuit claims that at the time it was filed to the court in Houston, Instagram had not removed the trafficker’s Instagram account. McAdams claims that despite repeated attempts by Meta to get the case dismissed, Shawna, who is seeking damages from the company, is now on the brink of taking her civil claim against Meta further through the US court system than any other case has managed. She believes that there are now no serious legal obstacles between her case and bringing Meta before a jury in 2024 to face allegations that it played an integral role in the trafficking of her client. A spokesperson for Meta said that Meta prohibits sex trafficking on its platforms “in no uncertain terms … we vigorously deny the claims made against Meta in this suit.” It is not the first time that Meta – in either of its guises as Meta Platforms Inc or Facebook Inc – has faced lawsuits containing similar allegations. Yet in the two decades since it was launched by Mark Zuckerberg from a Harvard dorm, his company – which rebranded from Facebook to Meta in 2021 – like other technology companies with servers based in the US, has never faced prosecution for illegal and harmful content and activities on its platforms. For decades, social media companies have sheltered behind an obscure clause in the 1996 Communications Decency Act – called section 230, which concludes that technology companies are not legally responsible for crimes that occur on their platforms. Section 230 states that providers of “interactive computer services” – which includes the owners of social media platforms and website hosts – should not be treated as the publisher of material posted by users. Since the act was passed, tech companies such as Meta have argued successfully in US courts that section 230 provides them with immunity from prosecution for any illegal content published on their platforms, as long as they are unaware of that content’s existence, building a fortress of legal precedent. Section 230 does not shield online platforms from federal criminal charges if they are seen as responsible for facilitating trafficking. And a recent amendment to section 230 – known as the Fosta-Sesta package – means that companies can be held liable under state and civil laws but must be shown to have knowingly assisted or facilitated sex trafficking. Other cases have attempted to swerve section 230, but in her federal suit, McAdams is instead tackling it head-on, arguing that it has been misunderstood and was never intended to protect a social media company which, she claims, knowingly allows crimes against children to occur on its platforms. “The problem is not section 230,” McAdams says. “The problem is 20 years of bad precedent and the court’s misinterpretation of 230. In no place does it say that there should be immunity. There is a big difference between immunity and no liability.” McAdams’ decision to tackle the interpretation of liability under section 230 comes as changing legal winds across the US challenge the lack of accountability granted to tech companies. The debate around section 230 has become highly polarised. Those who want the clause amended say that the legal safe haven it has provided for internet companies means they have no incentive to root out illegal content on their sites. Others warn that amending section 230 would curb free speech and dismantle democratic values online. Some sex worker groups also warn that undermining section 230 would harm their business and make them unsafe. McAdams says that the only way to stop social media platforms being used as online marketplaces for sex trafficking is through the courts. Along with Shawna’s case, McAdams has several similar suits filed against Meta across the US in which other plaintiffs allege that Meta enabled, facilitated and profited from their sex trafficking. “After years of being silenced, I hope my clients will have their day in court,” she says. “Their bravery and resilience has started something that could finally see the internet become a safer place for children and open the door for other survivors to be heard. I have many, many more victims waiting to have their cases reviewed. This is just the start.” A Meta spokesperson said: “Sex trafficking is abhorrent … we cooperate with law enforcement so they can find and prosecute the criminals who commit these heinous acts, and we use technology to help keep this abuse off our platforms.” “Our goal is to prevent people who seek to exploit others from using our platform, and we work closely with anti-trafficking experts and safety organisations around the world to inform these efforts. We will continue to join with others across society in the fight against sex trafficking and the predators who engage in it. “No court has found that there is any truth to [McAdams’s] allegations against Meta or that her claims are legally viable.”

1 0