8 Amendments of Jordi CAÑAS related to 2020/2013(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that it follows from Directive (EU) 2018/958AI should be a human-centric technology and that humans must always bear ultimate responsibility for decision-making that involves risks to the achievement of public interest objectives; stresses that machines should not be enabled to harm the physical integrity of human beings nor to confer rights or impose legal obligations on individuals; welcomes international efforts to ban lethal autonomous weapon systems without meaningful human control and calls upon the Commission to be in the lead to support these efforts;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission to increase cooperation at the international level on AI, coordinating work on AI with the OECD and promoting our future EU model on AI on the international scene; believes that the G7 and G20 are also major fora where the EU can play a determining role, as a first step to reaching a global consensus in the UN;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control, open source-powered approach within the EU that stores data locally and is always voluntarily; stresses that contract tracing mobile apps must strictly respect international human rights, rules on privacy and freedom of association; considers that AI technology should not be used in the apps in order to limit privacy and security risks;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principle of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy, without breaching obligations stemming from international law, such as due process;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls that the first offensive use of weapons based on artificial intelligence have been cyberattacks which directly or indirectly affect EU citizens and companies, with techniques ranging from political hacking to stealing of trade secrets; therefore urges the Member States and the Commission to take those threats seriously and invest heavily to achieve a high level of overall digital literacy, security research and use of open-source technology to reduce dependencies on third-country vendors and strengthen the single market;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Underlines that self-driving cars, ships and other means of transportation may ultimately operate transnationally and that this can raise new questions of interpretation and application of international law; urges the Commission to engage with international partners on this matter;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AIopen- source applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable algorithms, open data and public source-codes are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from betterinnovative, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost all over Europe in a compatible way.