Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The Civic Role of Online Service Providers

  • 166 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/1791/1791.pdf.

  2. 2.

    https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/helping-proteomics-scientists-share-peptide-data-azure-does-the-heavy-lifting/.

  3. 3.

    https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/03/assisting-pathologists-in-detecting.html.

  4. 4.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/07/google-ai-us-department-of-defense-military-drone-project-maven-tensorflow.

  5. 5.

    Page 10 of the pdf accessible at this link https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/1791/1791.pdf.

  6. 6.

    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/Privatesectorinthedigitalage.aspx.

References

  1. Black, J. (2001). Decentring regulation: understanding the role of regulation and self regulation in a “post-regulatory” world. Current Legal Problems, 54(1), 103–146.

  2. Broeders, D., & Taylor, L. (2017). Does great power come with great responsibility? The need to talk about corporate political responsibility. In M. Taddeo & L. Floridi (Eds.), The responsibilities of online service providers (Vol. 31, pp. 315–323). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47852-4_17.

  3. Calhoun, C. J. (Ed.). (2002). Dictionary of the social sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.

  4. Cerf, V. G. (2011). First, do no harm. Philosophy and Technology, 24(4), 463–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-011-0056-1.

  5. Coole, D., Frost, S., Bennett, J., Cheah, P., Orlie, M. A., & Grosz, E. (2010). New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics. Durham: Duke University Press Books.

  6. Cowls, J., & Floridi, L. (2018). Prolegomena to a white paper on an ethical framework for a good AI society. SSRN scholarly paper ID 3198732. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3198732.

  7. de Andrade, G., Nuno, N., Pawson, D., Muriello, D., Donahue, L., & Guadagno, J. (2018). Ethics and artificial intelligence: suicide prevention on facebook. Philosophy and Technology, 31(4), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0336-0.

  8. Floridi, L. (2013). Ethics of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  9. Floridi, L. (2014a). The fourth revolution, how the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  10. Floridi, L. (2014b). The onlife manifesto—Being human in a hyperconnected era. Dordrecht: Springer.

  11. Floridi, L. (2014c). Technoscience and ethics foresight. Philosophy and Technology, 27(4), 499–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-014-0180-9.

  12. Floridi, L. (2016). Mature information societies—A matter of expectations. Philosophy and Technology, 29(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0214-6.

  13. Floridi, L. (2017). Digital’s cleaving power and its consequences. Philosophy and Technology, 30(2), 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0259-1.

  14. Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics and the governance of the digital. Philosophy and Technology, 31(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0303-9.

  15. Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., et al. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5.

  16. Floridi, L., & Taddeo, M. (2016). What is data ethics? Philosophical Transactions A, 374, 20160360.

  17. Freeman, J. (1999). Private parties, public functions and the new administrative law. SSRN scholarly paper ID 165988. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=165988.

  18. Granka, L. A. (2010). The politics of search: A decade retrospective. The Information Society, 26(5), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2010.511560.

  19. Hasebrink, U. (2008). Comparing children’s online opportunities and risks across Europe: Cross-national comparisons for EU kids online: [European research on cultural, contextual and risk issues in children’s safe use of the internet and new media (2006–2009)]. London: EU Kids Online. http://www.eukidsonline.net/.

  20. Hinman, L. (2005). Esse est indicato in Google: Ethical and political issues in search engines. International Review of Information Ethics, 3(6), 19–25.

  21. Introna, L. D., & Nissenbaum, H. (2006). Shaping the web: Why the politics of search engines matters. SSRN scholarly paper ID 222009. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=222009.

  22. Laidlaw, E. (2008). Private power, public interest: An examination of search engine accountability. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 17(1), 113–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/ean018.

  23. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Human Relations, 1(2), 143–153.

  24. McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance: Mass communication and the public interest. London: Sage Publications.

  25. Metoyer-Duran, C. (1993). Information gatekeepers. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 28, 111–150.

  26. Pariser, E. (2012). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. London: Penguin.

  27. Price, M. E. (2002). Media and sovereignty: The global information revolution and its challenge to state power. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  28. Shapiro, A. L. (2000). The control revolution: How the internet is putting individuals in charge and changing the world we know (2nd ed.). New York: PublicAffairs.

  29. Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. With a new afterword by the author edition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  30. Taddeo, M. (2012a). Information warfare: A philosophical perspective. Philosophy and Technology, 25(1), 105–120.

  31. Taddeo, M. (2012b). An analysis for a just cyber warfare. In 2012 4th international conference on cyber conflict (CYCON 2012) (pp. 1–10).

  32. Taddeo, M. (2013). Cyber security and individual rights, striking the right balance. Philosophy and Technology, 26(4), 353–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-013-0140-9.

  33. Taddeo, M. (2014). The struggle between liberties and authorities in the information age. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9586-0.

  34. Taddeo, M. (2017). Trusting digital technologies correctly. Minds and Machines, 27(4), 565–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-017-9450-5.

  35. Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2015). The debate on the moral responsibilities of online service providers. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9734-1.

  36. Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (Eds.). (2017). The responsibilities of online service providers. New York: Springer.

  37. Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018a). Regulate artificial intelligence to avert cyber arms race. Nature, 556(7701), 296–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-04602-6.

  38. Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018b). How AI can be a force for good. Science, 361(6404), 751–752. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat5991.

  39. Zhang, C., Sun, J., Zhu, X., & Fang, Y. (2010). Privacy and security for online social networks: Challenges and opportunities. IEEE Network, 24(4), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2010.5510913.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Mariarosaria Taddeo.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taddeo, M. The Civic Role of Online Service Providers. Minds & Machines 29, 1–7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-019-09495-6

Download citation