Evidence of meeting #146 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transparency.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Prof. Christian Sandvig
I will defer to my colleague's assessment. I think it's a big question.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Michel Picard Liberal Montarville, QC
Okay. For my second question, then, who will decide what will be the norms when you create such an AI software system? If the norms are established by the corporate entities, we're going to end up in a business-type society. I don't think that's the way we want to go, so a wise man or a wise woman somewhere who everyone should recognize.... I haven't found one yet, not in government. Who is it going to be?
Mr. Sandvig.
4:30 p.m.
Prof. Christian Sandvig
I don't have a specific answer for you, to be honest. It's exciting to me that you're asking that question, because I worry that many people believe that they don't see an alternative to technologies that somehow come out of nowhere and they are then subject to, so I'm excited by the idea that these are not corporate and that these are things that we all have to decide as a society.
As to how to achieve that practically, I think this is quite challenging. We can endorse the principle of “democratic participation”, for example, as given in the Montreal statement. How do we achieve that? There are some models. There's the Scandinavian model of participatory design. There are ideas, but still, currently, I think we look at a landscape that is dominated by what have been called big social monopoly computing platforms—AI—and it's hard to see exactly how you will have a voice in it.
I'm hopeful that some of the proposals I discussed in my opening statement, and that previously were in your last report about structural changes to the industry, might provide openings for which we see another kind of participation—for example, a public alternative.
4:30 p.m.
Professor, Philosophy, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
In terms of norms, I tend to come down on the negative side. Making sure the norms don't come solely from the private sector and industry is paramount, but that's increasingly what we are seeing. It's called self-regulation. I'm not saying all the answers have to come from government—that would involve identifying the problem, first and foremost, which is no small feat—but government does need to take back control of the conversation around norms. It must ensure that businesses, professional bodies and civil society groups contribute to the conversation. I think government needs to assume control of the debate, which is why I'm so glad to be participating in this kind of forum.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Thank you, Mr. Picard, and thank you to our witnesses. I know it's something we could talk about for a lot longer than an hour. We appreciate your time today.
We're going to briefly suspend while we go in camera with Mr. Dufresne.
Again, thank you. I appreciate your contributions to our committee.
[Proceedings continue in camera]