title: Can we be friends with AI? What risks would arise from the proliferation of such friendships?

authors: Munn, Nicholas

abstract: In this paper we analyse friendships between humans and artificial intelligences, exploring the various arguments that have been or could be offered against the value of such friendships, and arguing that these objections do not stand up to critical scrutiny. As such, we argue that there is no good in-principle reason to oppose the development of human-AI friendships (although there may be some practical defeasible reasons to worry about such friendships becoming widespread). If we are right, there are important implications for how friendship is conceptualised and valued in modern times. Furthermore, if human-AI friendships are in-principle valuable, the moral responsibilities for how governments and corporations should act in regards to AI friends are quite different to those generated by human-AI friendships being dis-valuable.

text: Can we be friends with AI? What risks would arise from the proliferation of such friendships? In this paper we analyse friendships between humans and artificial intelligences, exploring the various arguments that have been or could be offered against the value of such friendships, and arguing that these objections do not stand up to critical scrutiny. As such, we argue that there is no good in-principle reason to oppose the development of human-AI friendships (although there may be some practical defeasible reasons to worry about such friendships becoming widespread). If we are right, there are important implications for how friendship is conceptualised and valued in modern times. Furthermore, if human-AI friendships are in-principle valuable, the moral responsibilities for how governments and corporations should act in regards to AI friends are quite different to those generated by human-AI friendships being dis-valuable.

year: 2023-05-23

title: Voice input and information exchange in asynchronous group communication

authors: McQueen, Robert J.

abstract: Existing computer supported co-operative work (CSCW) systems for group communication typically require some amount of keyboard input, and this may limit their usefulness. A voice input prototype system for asynchronous (time separated transactions) group communication (AGC) with simulated conversion to text was developed and an experiment constructed to investigate if advantages over conventional keyboard input computer conferencing were possible for the information exchange task. Increases in words used and facts disclosed were higher for voice input compared to text input, which implies that voice input capability could be advantageous for future asynchronous group communication systems supporting information exchange.

text: Voice input and information exchange in asynchronous group communication Existing computer supported co-operative work (CSCW) systems for group communication typically require some amount of keyboard input, and this may limit their usefulness. A voice input prototype system for asynchronous (time separated transactions) group communication (AGC) with simulated conversion to text was developed and an experiment constructed to investigate if advantages over conventional keyboard input computer conferencing were possible for the information exchange task. Increases in words used and facts disclosed were higher for voice input compared to text input, which implies that voice input capability could be advantageous for future asynchronous group communication systems supporting information exchange.

year: 1992

title: The Environmental Justice Implications of the Planning Policy and Practice of Flood Risk Management in New Zealand

authors: Martynoga, Charlotte

subjects: environmental justce

abstract: Following an international trend, the flood defence approach historically applied in New Zealand has been superseded by a shift to flood risk management, an approach that aligns with the notion of ‘living with risk’ and devolves responsibility to risk-takers at the local level. Citizens are required to assume responsibility for assessing and minimising their own exposure, increasing their resilience and adapting to periodic flooding events. Inevitably, specific communities respond differently to flooding as their capabilities to understand, identify and manage flood risk varies. Environmental justice is the framework of inquiry within which issues of power, representation and participation in planning for flood risk management are examined to consider the injustices that are experienced by communities ‘living with risk’. 

Quantitative and qualitative methods are used to investigate the extent planning is complicit in delivering flood risk management processes that can create environmentally unjust outcomes. Flood hazard maps overlaid with contextual demographic data identify who is living in at risk spaces in three case-study communities. Primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with local government representatives and iwi, and a questionnaire to local residents was followed by interviews. 

The analysis demonstrates how the environmental justice components of distributive justice, procedural justice, justice as recognition and a capabilities approach to justice are tied together in the political and social processes of managing floods. Procedural justice is based on participatory parity so ensuring all members of the affected community are treated fairly in the deliberative and discursive decision-making is essential. Evidence revealed a community’s limited access to extensive flood risk information, unequal power sharing in decision-making and community participation, and restricted ability for disadvantaged groups to access legal processes. Distributive justice demands the use of multi-criteria analysis, rather than cost-benefit analysis, in prioritising and directing flood risk management to vulnerable communities. Using direct benefit rating to fund flood mitigation works heightens existing inequalities within communities and demands consideration of social difference in flood risk vulnerabilities. To ensure justice as recognition, local and indigenous knowledge needs to be valued and included in decision-making processes. Whilst working party arrangements are not inclusive they empower communities to be actively involved, promote trust and ownership of their local place and flood risk project. Recognition of identities and cultural practices is crucial for self-determination and minimises the marginalisation of voices. Planners need to examine social aspects of how people perceive, adapt and cope with flood risk, alongside place-based vulnerability. Policy, in embracing a capabilities approach to justice, would focus on the functionings people actually achieve rather than the opportunities. This calls for removing aggregations to look at the capabilities of individuals and communities to manage and respond to their flood risk. Judgements on planning initiatives need to be based on whether distributional outcomes enhance the capabilities of the relatively disadvantaged, thereby improving the resilience capacity of a community to manage flood risk. 

This study bridges a research gap in drawing together flood risk management, planning and environmental justice; advancing understanding of the environmental injustices within flood risk management in New Zealand.

text: The Environmental Justice Implications of the Planning Policy and Practice of Flood Risk Management in New Zealand Following an international trend, the flood defence approach historically applied in New Zealand has been superseded by a shift to flood risk management, an approach that aligns with the notion of ‘living with risk’ and devolves responsibility to risk-takers at the local level. Citizens are required to assume responsibility for assessing and minimising their own exposure, increasing their resilience and adapting to periodic flooding events. Inevitably, specific communities respond differently to flooding as their capabilities to understand, identify and manage flood risk varies. Environmental justice is the framework of inquiry within which issues of power, representation and participation in planning for flood risk management are examined to consider the injustices that are experienced by communities ‘living with risk’. 

Quantitative and qualitative methods are used to investigate the extent planning is complicit in delivering flood risk management processes that can create environmentally unjust outcomes. Flood hazard maps overlaid with contextual demographic data identify who is living in at risk spaces in three case-study communities. Primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with local government representatives and iwi, and a questionnaire to local residents was followed by interviews. 

The analysis demonstrates how the environmental justice components of distributive justice, procedural justice, justice as recognition and a capabilities approach to justice are tied together in the political and social processes of managing floods. Procedural justice is based on participatory parity so ensuring all members of the affected community are treated fairly in the deliberative and discursive decision-making is essential. Evidence revealed a community’s limited access to extensive flood risk information, unequal power sharing in decision-making and community participation, and restricted ability for disadvantaged groups to access legal processes. Distributive justice demands the use of multi-criteria analysis, rather than cost-benefit analysis, in prioritising and directing flood risk management to vulnerable communities. Using direct benefit rating to fund flood mitigation works heightens existing inequalities within communities and demands consideration of social difference in flood risk vulnerabilities. To ensure justice as recognition, local and indigenous knowledge needs to be valued and included in decision-making processes. Whilst working party arrangements are not inclusive they empower communities to be actively involved, promote trust and ownership of their local place and flood risk project. Recognition of identities and cultural practices is crucial for self-determination and minimises the marginalisation of voices. Planners need to examine social aspects of how people perceive, adapt and cope with flood risk, alongside place-based vulnerability. Policy, in embracing a capabilities approach to justice, would focus on the functionings people actually achieve rather than the opportunities. This calls for removing aggregations to look at the capabilities of individuals and communities to manage and respond to their flood risk. Judgements on planning initiatives need to be based on whether distributional outcomes enhance the capabilities of the relatively disadvantaged, thereby improving the resilience capacity of a community to manage flood risk. 

This study bridges a research gap in drawing together flood risk management, planning and environmental justice; advancing understanding of the environmental injustices within flood risk management in New Zealand.

year: 2018