9. Poor security, safety,
and resilience of
internet products and
services
https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2018/04/16/medical-device-hackers/
10. Unequal vulnerabilities to
fraud, surveillance, and
inequalities around
pricing and access
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/big-tech-apps-for-the-next-billion-underperform
11. The impact of
algorithms and AI on
our lives
https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing
14. Doteveryone is a think tank established to
champion responsible technology for the good
of everyone in society.
15. • We want to see responsible creation
and operation of technologies in
practice
• We take a systems perspective,
looking at technology products,
services and systems and how they fit
with people and society
• We care about people
18. Business models, ownership and control
The business model, and the ownership and
control of the organisation, and the product or
service, are responsible and appropriate
Employment and working conditions
Inclusive employment, fair pay and conditions,
including at suppliers
Reward for contributions
Fair reward to all those contributing information or
other effort
Societal impact
The impact of the tech on public/societal value is
positive or neutral
Unintended consequences
There has been consideration of systems effects,
side effects, potential harms and unintended
consequences
Maintenance, service and support
Consideration of maintenance, service and support over
the long term
Understandability
People can easily find out and understand how the
product/service works
Standards and best practice
Relevant tech standards and best practices, and systems
design are used and evident
Usability
If a broad range of users are expected, or if some users
may be compelled to use the product or service, it should be
accessible and have appropriate support
Context and Environment
The context of the system, product or service has been
considered and addressed appropriately; including
sustainability considerations
19. Business models, ownership and control
The business model, and the ownership and
control of the organisation, and the product or
service, are responsible and appropriate
Employment and working conditions
Inclusive employment, fair pay and conditions,
including at suppliers
Reward for contributions
Fair reward to all those contributing information or
other effort
Societal impact
The impact of the tech on public/societal value is
positive or neutral
Unintended consequences
There has been consideration of systems effects,
side effects, potential harms and unintended
consequences
Maintenance, service and support
Consideration of maintenance, service and support over
the long term
Understandability
People can easily find out and understand how the
product/service works
Standards and best practice
Relevant tech standards and best practices, and systems
design are used and evident
Usability
If a broad range of users are expected, or if some users
may be compelled to use the product or service, it should be
accessible and have appropriate support
Context and Environment
The context of the system, product or service has been
considered and addressed appropriately; including
sustainability considerations
20. Business models, ownership and control
The business model, and the ownership and
control of the organisation, and the product or
service, are responsible and appropriate
Employment and working conditions
Inclusive employment, fair pay and conditions,
including at suppliers
Reward for contributions
Fair reward to all those contributing information or
other effort
Societal impact
The impact of the tech on public/societal value is
positive or neutral
Unintended consequences
There has been consideration of systems effects,
side effects, potential harms and unintended
consequences
Maintenance, service and support
Consideration of maintenance, service and support over
the long term
Understandability
People can easily find out and understand how the
product/service works
Standards and best practice
Relevant tech standards and best practices, and systems
design are used and evident
Usability
If a broad range of users are expected, or if some users
may be compelled to use the product or service, it should be
accessible and have appropriate support
Context and Environment
The context of the system, product or service has been
considered and addressed appropriately; including
sustainability considerations
21. What is a trust mark
system?
1. a system to assess
digital products and
services against standards
2. a way for consumers to
identify responsibly
produced digital products
and services
22. – Onora O’Neill
“Those who want others’ trust have to do two things.
First, they have to be trustworthy, which requires
competence, honesty and reliability.
Second, they have to provide intelligible evidence
that they are trustworthy, enabling others to judge
intelligently where they should place or refuse
their trust.”
23. • a voluntary scheme
• a mark or indicator of some sort
• backed by an open evidence base
• values-based criteria
• business and technical aspects
Trustworthy tech mark concept
24. • a voluntary scheme
• a mark or indicator of some sort
• backed by an open evidence base
• values-based criteria
• business and technical aspects
Trustworthy tech mark concept
28. • consumer purchasing pressure is a limited
lever for change at present
• many trust mark / label projects have
failed or had little impact
• developing a full trust mark system is a
multi-year investment (standards, audit,
consumer brand)
30. understand and respect the different contexts and
communities the technology operates within
anticipate potential unintended consequences of
technology
examine value systems holistically; be transparent
around contributions of value made and received
31. understand and respect the different contexts and
communities the technology operates within
anticipate potential unintended consequences of
technology
examine value systems holistically; be transparent
around contributions of value made and received
32. understand and respect the different contexts and
communities the technology operates within
anticipate potential unintended consequences of
technology
examine value systems holistically; be transparent
around contributions of value made and received
33. understand and respect the different contexts and
communities the technology operates within
anticipate potential unintended consequences of
technology
examine value systems holistically; be transparent
around contributions of value made and received
34. understand and respect the different contexts and
communities the technology operates within
anticipate potential unintended consequences of
technology
examine value systems holistically; be transparent
around contributions of value made and received
35. creating practical tools to embed
in the consumer tech
development cycle
to encourage responsible
development
41. move a bit slower
and
think about things
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/15/taplock_broken_screwdriver/
42. We can engineer trustworthy digital
products, services and systems,
which are competently made,
reliable, and honest
about what they do and how they do
it.
44. “Responsible technology is no longer a nice thing to
do to look good, it’s becoming a fundamental pillar
of corporate business models. In a post-Cambridge
Analytica world, consumers are demanding better
technology and more transparency. Companies that
do create those services are the ones that will have
a better, brighter future.”
Kriti Sharma, VP of AI at Sage
going to talk about what responsible technology looks like
why we need it
and how we are trying to get more of it
Doteveryone recently ran a nationally representative survey in the UK. let’s see how you compare
how many of you feel the internet has made your life better? hands up?
ok and how many of you feel the internet has made your life worse?
half the people felt the internet had really improved things for them individually
but many don’t see the same benefit for society as a whole
we want technology that is useful, has benefits definitely outweighing harms, that we can rely on.
We look to the developers and operators of technology to act responsibly, to be honest about what they do, so that we can have confidence in their products and services. Whilst it’s easy to think it’s just an issue for the big silicon valley companies, or about personal information, responsible tech goes beyond these
we say responsible technology considers its social impact and seeks to understand and minimise potential unintended consequences
that means
not knowingly worsening inequality
recognising and respecting human dignity and rights
giving people confidence in the tech
and there’s no shortage of examples there this isn’t the case today
here are some random ones
poor security and resilience, here of connected medical equipment
vulnerable people getting worse experiences online, worsening inequality
examples of AI being used for really important applications and causing harm
and of course issues with personal data, whether that affects individuals, or here, national security through the strava fitness data release
The world of technology development is maturing and, like other innovations, it’s a time for reflection, stabilisation, building good practice. It will take time and — a shift in culture and practice, a change in the relationships between tech and government and society, new ways of measuring things.
Building technology responsibly is simply what we should be doing: in big corporates and startups, in nonprofits and communities, when building electronics or software, for infrastructure and products and toys and tools.
I’m from Doteveryone, we’re a think tank
we take a systems approach in our work
we work with government, civil society, consumers, industry…
. there are specialist groups looking at AI or data, or even Robotics or security.
but Doteveryone takes a more holistic view
We want to see responsible technologies in practice, not just theoretical frameworks - there’s many of them, ethical manifestos and oaths, etc
We take a systems perspective, looking beyond specific niche fields. My fitness tracker is a wearable, it’s IOT, it’s a mobile app, it’s machine learning, - many things. one aspect alone won’t tell you if it’s responsible
We don’t seek tech solutions to tech problems!
i’m here to talk about how we change the tech industry
in the near term
Responsible practice isn’t just about the technology itself — it’s about the people who develop, manage and invest in tech, and the wider context.
after researching these ideas, in early 2017, we identified 10 aspects of responsible tech. you can see how they cut across tech and business. responsibility means more than a single tech standard, or a bit of user testing, or having a diverse product team.
these are all the areas you should think about in a tech business. companies will do well on some, less well on others. there will always be scope to improve.
we considered a variety of levers for change to shift tech industry practice. A lot of tech isn’t seen as trustworthy today, often because it does badly at some of the above - it’s hard to use in some way, or stops working, or exploits workers . so We started exploring the idea of what a consumer trustmark might look like.
a mark would need to offer value to those who make technology, by enabling them to demonstrate their responsible practices; and value to consumers who can make more informed choices about what technologies to use.
to have confidence in the tech in our world, it needs to be trustworthy
cambridge philosopher onora oneil - you need to be competent, honest, reliable
and be able to demonstrate that
a really powerful concept, aligned with the trust mark idea
we learned from other marks and schemes, aiming to be lightweight, scalable and also testable. we wanted to address the variety and complexity of digital tech, and the speed of change (with software updates - a certification at a single point in time doesn’t make sense).
an open evidence base could be an important part of this. A place where organisations can show their credentials, which can be checked by consumers, retailers, advocacy groups or even employees, providing accountability. which can be kept up to date, showing how products evolve. This also allows organisations to surface and talk about the grey areas, the tradeoffs, in being responsible. Because things are rarely black and white. (fairphone example)
so we ran a prototype with startups
to explore how they perform across the 10 areas we defined - each week, a set of questions and exercises to reflect on and document their practice
to see what they could demonstrate, easily, to an external evaluator.
could we, as reviewers, feel we had a good sense of the businesses?
the programme went well - the companies learned new things, and most improved their practices
they wanted to be transparent and found this process useful in that
the companies valued a structure to help them - our 10 aspects of responsibility was useful
and to have a process that encouraged the teams and business leaders to think about what they were doing.
to take a moment to reflect on a bigger picture issue, that maybe isn’t tracked day to day in normal business metrics
but we realised that whilst the exercises were useful, and our technology questions were unique and valuable,
the trust mark idea didn’t feel practical for us at this time - it’s very hard to define standards, a slow journey to develop a consumer brand. Other projects have failed
but tools for business seemed like a way we could make a difference
Assuming that the business side is responsible already (and there are systems available for responsible employment, ownership, governance etc - such as BCorps certification), what are the really critical components of responsibility for digital?
we refined the 10 aspects into 3
first, Technology in a wider context. beyond a single user journey. we relate differently to technologies as family members, as consumers, as citizens, as workers. Plus social and environmental impact, locally and wider scale
unintended consequences don’t have to be negative — maybe you come to dominate the market… security; unexpected uses; maintenance; external trends
Consider potential consequences, minimise their impact and engage with those effected
If this seems obvious to you, it seems that way to me too, but much silicon valley “move fast and break things” culture goes against this :)
contribution may often be, say, personal data in exchange for services, - but also things like mechanical turk, or “I’m not a robot” captchas helping Google to grow its machine learning capabilities. This isn’t inherently a bad thing. But there needs to be transparency
if you are using open source, are you giving back? supporting the libraries that make your product possible?
together it’s a framework for businesses to work through
We are developing tools which product teams can use to help them examine and evaluate each of these areas. everything from checklists to board games.
We want to create ways for product teams and business leaders to be able to think about their responsibilities to society in a concrete way that then becomes embedded within the process of creating, maintaining and updating technology.
this isn’t an accountability system, it’s a way to make best practice easier for teams day to day, based on needs we’ve encountered
responsibility isn’t a free lunch – it takes work or sacrifice. Consider an organisation struggling between good user experience and viral effects their investors want to see to give highest growth. knowing what is right is not always obvious, and knowing what to do about it even less so.
it’s hard when - your competitor may be moving fast and breaking things
but customers are starting to look for responsible products where they can.
It’s easier for organisations starting out to be responsible; their values, the people they recruit, the customers and investors they target are more aligned.
Doteveryone are defining responsible tech with a european mindset, based on our values as an organisation.
They are not global values or ethics. It’s not the view of silicon valley, or China, for instance. May not work everywhere
remember being responsible doesn’t require complex abstract philosophical ethics in most cases.
we can do well with basic common sense, thinking through risks and planning sensibly. (If you are designing a lock, think about how malicious people could open it!)
Incidents of bad design affect the perception of tech as a whole. We need to do better at calling out silly mistakes early, helping each other to build better products, learning together
We can’t engineer people’s trust. That would be manipulative – and sometimes people are right not to trust some technologies.
We can engineer trustworthy digital systems, competently made, reliable, and honest about what they do and how they do it.
It is an individual responsibility on each developer, designer, leader.
through customers, investors, employees and government all demanding better development practice – things will change.
We don’t need regulation. We can have governance through open technical standards; improved practice sector-wide through templates for better design, tools to evaluate impact and think through risks.
Pioneering companies and responsible businesses are already doing this.
this is the start of a wider movement, and we can all play a part in it.