Engaging rational discrimination: exploring reasons for placing regulatory constraints on decision support systems

By O. Gandy. 2010

88 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Decision Sciences, Sociology and Political Science

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Decision Sciences

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms (2016, background): “For this type of opacity, one proposed response is to make code available for scrutiny, through regulatory means if necessary (Diakopoulos, 2013; Gandy, 2010; Pasquale, 2015).”
Where fairness fails: data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse (2019, background): “In his 2010 article ‘ Engaging Rational Discrimination, ’ Oscar Gandy, Jr. lamented that, after nearly half a century of work on privacy and surveillance studies, he is resigned to the fact that neither ‘ are adequate to the task of managing a system whose purpose is discrimination ’ (p. 31).”
Sociotechnical Harms of Algorithmic Systems: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reduction (2022, background): “As they retain social and technical elements, they cannot be reme-died by technical fixes [94] alone.”
Sociotechnical Harms: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reduction (2022, background): “In sum, as harms from algorithmic systems are sociotechnical and co-produced through social and technical elements, they cannot be remedied by technical ﬁxes [83] alone.”
Critical Perspectives on Governance Mechanisms for AI/ML Systems (2020, background): “Philosophers and social theorists of technology such as Nissenbaum (2010), Gandy (2009), Johnson (2007), Pfaffenberger (1992), and Winner (1988) have variously argued technical speciﬁcations can and should be only one element of a broader, multidisciplinary assessment of digital technologies and…”
Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason (2017, background): “This may be morally relevant if causal relationships are considered to be more legitimate grounds on which to base decisions than mere correlations (Gandy, 2010).”
Governance of algorithms: options and limitations (2015, background): “social discrimination (Gandy, 2010; Gangadharan, 2014);”
The new profiling: Algorithms, black boxes, and the failure of anti-discriminatory safeguards in the European Union (2014, methodology): “New forms of algorithmic risk assessment remove the mechanisms of security governance from the eye, leaving behind a new series of hyper-rationalized discrimination issues (Gandy, 2010) that pose major hurdles for the legal tools of traditional anti-discriminatory safeguards.”