Grzegorz P. Mika (AI Transparency Institute) and Eva Thelisson (same) have posted “Application of Swiss Private Law by AI” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
The current debate on the deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the judicial process raises the question of how humans apply the law, and if AI can be of use in this process. Similar to other legal systems, Swiss private law provides for explicit rules and guidance prescriptions as to its own application, which judges have to apply in the decision-making process. These rules for instance mandate the inclusion of meaning, as opposed to wording, of any statute. These rules also prescribe the way of ruling in the absence of statute. These rules command good faith as well as equity to construe and sometimes to limit or deny rights and duties at stake. Good faith in particular governs the rules and principles of interpretation of contracts and other expressions of intent in private law. Equity is meant to serve as guidance to apply openly or broadly formulated statutes. AI would also have to observe these rules and principles of application of the law. This article aims at assessing whether AI systems could comply with these rules of judicial ruling.
Kelsie Nabben (RMIT University – Blockchain Innovation Hub; Digital Ethnography Research Centre; RMIT University – ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society) has posted “Governance of Algorithms, Governance by Algorithms: Are ‘Decentralised Autonomous Organisations’ a Blueprint for Participatory Digital Organisation?” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Algorithms are inherently centralised processes, from coding, to training, to deployment and maintenance. Meanwhile, blockchain communities are experimenting with “Decentralised Autonomous Organisations” (DAOs) as a participatory institutional framework for individual autonomy to organise outside organisations. DAOs are an attempt at decentralised organisation to self-govern, using algorithms, for autonomy from third-party mediation. This piece explores if DAOs can teach us anything decentralised approaches to the governance of algorithms. With the rise of algorithmic decision-making systems in public administrative processes, this research seeks to uncover the dynamics of DAOs as participatory ways to organise outside of organisations in the digital age. I explore the case study of “GitcoinDAO” as a decentralised organisation governed by algorithms, whilst simultaneously seeking to collectively govern algorithms to manage a machine learning process to detect fraudulent “sybil” attacks. With algorithms as peers in decentralised organisations, algorithms emerge as new political actors in how people organise outside of traditional organisations in the digital age. DAOs provide this institutional framework in the articulation of shared objectives, codes of conduct, and “constitutions”, to guide algorithmic governance design. This locates humans and algorithms as peers in organising, establishing algorithms as political actors in shaping and determining the outcomes of decentralised organisation and human autonomy. This research provides insights into the social outcomes of algorithmic governance for others seeking to explore participatory digital institutional infrastructures.
Thibault Schrepel (University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne; VU University Amsterdam; Stanford University’s Codex Center; Sciences Po) has posted “Smart Contracts and the Digital Single Market Through the Lens of a ‘Law + Technology’ Approach” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
The deployment of smart contracts within the European zone could fluidify economic transactions. It also risks fragmenting the Digital Single Market (“DSM”). This conundrum calls for a constructive response to preserve both the benefits brought by smart contracts and a strong DSM.
Against this background, this report adopts a “law + technology” approach. It suggests combining law and technology to develop solutions that encourage the evolution of smart contracts (rather than hindering it) in a direction that preserves and reinforces the DSM.
Wulf A. Kaal (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota – School of Law) has posted “Reputation as Capital – How DAOs Upgrade Finance” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) have the potential to upgrade finance. This paper evaluates the design of and system requirements for a decentralized cryptocurrency venture capital investment club that is operating as a DAO (DAOIC). The design of the proposed DAOIC enables investors to substitute capital commitments by way of reputation token staking on proposed portfolio companies. The proposed design has the potential to lower capital requirements and free up liquidity for decentralized smart contract coordinated investment vehicles.