In this episode I talk to Jacob Turner. Jacob is a barrister and author. We chat about his new book, Robot Rules: Regulating Artificial Intelligence (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018), which discusses how to address legal responsibility, rights and ethics for AI.
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:33 – Why did Jacob write Robot Rules?
- 2:47 – Do we need special legal rules for AI?
- 6:34 – The responsibility ‘gap’ problem
- 11:50 – Private law vs criminal law: why it’s important to remember the distinction
- 14:08 – Is is easy to plug the responsibility gap in private law?
- 23:07 – Do we need to think about the criminal law responsibility gap?
- 26:14 – Is it absurd to hold AI criminally responsible?
- 30:24 – The problem with holding proximate humans responsible
- 36:40 – The positive side of responsibility: lessons from the Monkey selfie case
- 41:50 – What is legal personhood and what it mean to grant it to an AI?
- 48:57 – Pragmatic reasons for granting an AI legal personhood
- 51:48 – Is this a slippery slope?
- 56:00 – Explainability and AI: Why is this important?
- 1:02:38 – Is there are right to explanation under EU law?
- 1:06:16 – Is explainability something that requires a technical solution not a legal solution?
- 1:08:32 – The danger of fetishising explainability
- Robot Rules: Regulating Artificial Intelligence
- Website for the book
- Jacob on Twitter
- Jacob giving a lecture about the book at the University of Law
- “Robots, Law and the Retribution Gap” by John Danaher
- The Darknet Shopper Case
- The Monkey Selfie Case
- Algorithmic Entities by Lynn LoPucki (discussing Shawn Bayern’s argument)
- Matthew Scherer’s critique of Bayern’s claim that AI’s can already acquire legal personhood