- limit tech disruption
- protect users both as individuals and as a community,
both as citizens and as consumers
- protect trusted institutions
- research ---> education
- Structural assuraces
- transparency
- accountability
- clarity of rules, enforcement
- dispute resolution
- harm mitigation
- create legal clarity, and enforce laws
- create transparency & accountability
- create market competition (through antitrust, interoperability reqs.)
- embed global technology in local communities, cities, cultures,
economies, governance frameworks
How do we produce interpersonal trust with technology?
---- institutional backdrop --- Uber ---
Mediated trust
- FB -- google -- ebay ---
--- wikipedia --- yelp --
internal features
How do we produce trust with technology?
trust
- trusting stance
- disposition to trust
- faith in humanity
- (faith in technology)
- means of control
- insurance
- ability
- benevolence (act in the interest of the trustor)
- intergrity (value congruence)
Institutional actors
- transparency
- accountability
- governance
trust
2
twitter - alibaba - taskrabbit - AirBnB-
logics of technological trust production
Are trust mediators trustworthy?
institutional backdrop
Balazs Bodo
- Situational normality
- shared background knowledge
- shared rules of the game
Control of the past
- global, interaction-specific reputation management systems
University of Amsterdam
Institute for Infrmation Law
Blockchain&Society Policy Research Lab
- Structural assuraces
- oversight
- regulation
- dispute resolution, enforcement
- harm mitigation
- competition
- temporal, social, physical embeddedness
bodo@uva.nl
https://www.ivir.nl/
https://blockchain-society.science/
Control of the present
- blockchains and smart contracts
Control of the future
- reducing future uncertainty through ML and AI based predictions
Can we trust technological trust producers?
Are trust mediating technologies themselves trustworthy?
institutional backdrop
Coronavirus apps raise privacy concerns
- we rely on complex techno-social systems to produce interpersonal trust on a global scale
- these systems are not trustworthy
mistrust, no use
Airbnb claims it uses an AI system to filter out psychopath guests.
TUST
MEDIATORS
Ability
- rapidly shifting black box technologies,
- fragmented user experience,
- little independent verification
Hundreds of millions of smart home devices let unexpected third parties, subcontractors, hackers, and law enforcement agencies access to our homes.
mistrust, no choice
Uber, FB, google, wikipedia,
blockchain tech, ebay, twitter,
alibaba, taskrabbit, AirBnB,
self driving cars, AI, smart devices, ...
Benevolence
information & power assymetries:
users interests < investors, creditors, advertisers, data users, growth, power, geopolitical interests
we must avoid untrustworthy systems we have no choice in using
CAN WE TRUST TECHNOLOGY?
faith based, a- rational trust
Internal features
deepfakes
Integrity
- disruption (of familiarity, situational normalcy)
- global tech in local context:
USA != EU != China != Russia;
face recognition in policing != face recognition in gaming
Facebook and Twitter give starkly different responses
to misinformation and foreign propaganda.
- technology design
- governance
- business models
confidence
Local News Stations Run Propaganda Segment Scripted and Produced by Amazon
OkCupid shares data on customers’ sexuality, drug use and political views with 3rd party analytics company.
- internal trustworthiness guarantees are inadequate and need to be improved
- governance
- transparency
- external trustworthiness guarantees need to be strengthtened
- regulation
- accountability & oversight
- local embeddedness
Coronavirus books plagiarized from news outlets dominate Amazon search results.
- Situational normality
- shared background knowledge
- shared rules of the game
+
TheDAO
Uber drivers are using fake IDs to circumvent restrictions
fake reviews