10 Amendments of Marco ZULLO related to 2020/2017(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the Commission has proposed to rapidly deploy products and services that rely on AI in areas of public interest and the public sector; emphasises that in the education sector, this deployment should be accompanied by an ongoing review and updating of the relevant sectoral rules and should involve educators, learners and wider society and take their needs, their real opportunities and the expected benefits into account in order to ensure that AI is used purposefully and ethically, in a way that ensures the utmost protection of fundamental rights and ensures that human beings are, ultimately, always able to control and correct the system's decisions;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to include the education sector in the regulatory framework for high-risk AI applications given the importance of ensuring that education continues to contribute to the public good and given the high sensitivity of data on pupils, students and other learners; points out, accordingly, that appropriate conformity assessments are needed, to verify and ensure that all the provisions concerning high-risk applications are complied with, including test, inspection and certification requirements; underlines that data sets used to train AI should be reviewed, to ensure that they are reliable and accurate, to avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes and other biases based on gender, ethnic and racial origin, religion or beliefs, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. CEmphasises that in the education sector, the roll-out of AI-based products and services should be accompanied by an ongoing review and updating of the relevant sectoral rules and should involve educators, learners and society as a whole and take their needs, their real possibilities and the expected benefits into account in order to ensure that AI is used purposefully and ethically, in a way that guarantees the utmost protection of fundamental rights and ensures that human beings are, ultimately, always able to check and correct the system's decisions; considers that AI has great potential to promote gender equality provided that conscious and unconscious bias are eliminated; stresses the need for AI to respect the principles and values of equality and non-discrimination between women and men; stresses, further, the importance of a risk-based approach and of continuous monitoring of existing and new algorithms;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Urges the Commission to preserve and promote the plurality of reference theories upon which to base the development of AI systems;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Expresses concern over the use, in some local areas, of AI applications for remote biometric identification purposes; points out that the use of intrusive surveillance technologies, particularly in high-risk sectors such as education, may infringe fundamental rights as it implies the use of sensitive data;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern that schools and other public education providers are becoming increasingly dependent on educational technology services, including AI applications, provided by just a few technology companies; stresses that this may lead to unequal access to data and limit competition by restricting consumer choice; calls for this data to be accessible, interoperable and of high quality, and to be shared with the relevant public authorities so it can be used in the development of curricula and pedagogical practices (in particular since these services are purchased with public money or offered to public education providers for free, and because education is a common good);
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses, given the highly sensitive nature of the data concerning pupils, students and other learners, the need for appropriate conformity assessments to verify and ensure that all the provisions concerning high-risk applications are complied with, including test, inspection and certification requirements; emphasises that data sets used to train AI systems should be reviewed to ensure that they are reliable and accurate, to avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes and other biases based on gender, ethnic and racial origin, religion or beliefs, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Expresses concern at the use, in some local areas, of AI applications for remote biometric identification purposes; points out that the use of intrusive surveillance technologies, particularly in high-risk sectors such as education, may infringe fundamental rights, as it involves the use of sensitive data;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for diverse teams of developers and engineers working alongside the main actors in the educational, cultural and audiovisual sector in order to prevent gender and cultural bias being inadvertently included in AI algorithms, systems and applications. urges the Commission to preserve and promote the plurality of reference theories on which the development of AI systems is based;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the importance of putting in place a proper framework for the public procurement of such services for the public sector, including for education providers, to ensure maximum transparency, consumer choice and the respect of fundamental rights; stresses the need for public buyers to take into account specific criteria, such as non-discrimination, environmental sustainability and data privacy, and, specifically when purchasing services for public education providers, the involvement of educators and learners;