Apologies for cross-posting
Dear all,
Please find below the abstract for our panel at EASST 2022. We very much lo=
ok forward to receiving your submissions by the 1st of February.
With very best wishes,
Jens and Daniel
THE POLITICS OF AI-BASED SECURITY - PREDICTING AND IMAGINING THE FUTURE
Jens H=E4lterlein (Centre for Security and Society, University Freiburg)
Daniel Marciniak (Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle (Saal=
e))
Abstract:
Advancements in the AI-subfield of machine learning are already transformin=
g security practices in various contexts, including military operations, po=
licing, intelligence work, private security, and pandemic management. In ma=
ny cases, the use of AI-based security technologies aims at predicting the =
future based on probabilistic calculation. In law enforcement, for instance=
, AI can be used to pinpoint likely places and times of future crimes, terr=
orist attacks, and social unrest or to identify individuals at high risk of=
becoming a future (re)offender, terrorist, or victim (Benbouzid 2019, Bray=
ne 2021, H=E4lterlein 2021). Moreover, in the course of the Covid-19 pandem=
ic, AI has been increasingly used for epidemiological modelling of how the =
disease spreads along with different scenarios. These technoscientific pred=
ictions render the future knowledgeable in order to act upon it. They are p=
olitical in the sense that they legitimize certain interventions and delegi=
timize others.
While tech companies highlight the merits of equipping security actors with=
these seemingly
powerful tools and both activists and critical scholars raise awareness for=
the dangers that their use can bring with regard to data protection and th=
e discrimination of minorities, AI-based security technologies have also be=
come a matter of concern for policy-making. In recent years, many governmen=
ts and supranational organisations have published strategy papers in which =
they present their visions of the future development and application of AI.=
These different visions articulated by various actors at once describe pos=
sible technoscientific futures and prescribe technoscientific futures that =
ought to be attained or to be avoided. They aim to legitimize investments i=
n and/or the stricter regulations of AI-based security technologies.
In conversation with the conference theme, we invite scholarship that seeks=
to discuss the practice and politics of technoscientific futures. We welco=
me presentations that address at least one of the following questions:
- How are AI-based security technologies used to predict or forecast li=
kely future events? How do they relate to non-AI-based practices of predict=
ion?
- How do these technoscientific practices of prediction relate to (pre-=
existing) practices of transforming or governing the future (pre-emption, p=
revention, pre-mediation, contingency planning, risk insurance etc.)?
- What are the obstacles of doing research in this field and how can we=
deal with them?
- How are questions of security addressed within the imagination of fut=
ures of AI? Presentations may examine imaginaries at all levels: national g=
overnments, international organisations, NGOs, communities of practice, sci=
entific communities, corporations, social movements and not least science f=
iction.
- How do desirable futures relate to criticisms of and resistance to AI=
-based security technologies (lethal autonomous weapon systems, biometric f=
acial recognition, predictive policing, etc.)? What alternatives are imagin=
ed?
- What is the impact of the politics of imagining futures of AI on the =
politics of predicting futures with AI?
Daniel Marciniak, PhD
(he/him/his)
Research Fellow
Anthropology of AI in Policing and Justice
https://www.eth.mpg.de/anthropologyAI
https://www.eth.mpg.de/marciniak
Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology
Advokatenweg 36, 06114 Halle (Saale), Germany
