Suchergebnisse

International audience ; As a preliminary, let us recall, before addressing the questions of ethics and scientific integrity raised by the COVID-19, the astonishment which seized the whole of the French population at beginning of confinement, to the point that we all remained deaf to the warnings issued by our friends in Lombardy, quarantined since February 21, then subjected to confinement which was gradually reinforced the following week, before being extended across Italy, on March 8. Scientific integrity From the beginning of the pandemic, politicians have resorted to a large number of licensed scientists, epidemiologists, data modellers, biologists, doctors, sociologists, etc., to put realistic action plans in place. Taking advantage of the disarray in the population, some charismatic personalities have explained that, in an emergency, we could, or in the name of pragmatism, even had to free ourselves from the rules of research ethics and the usual validation procedures in sciences, to be guided by the intuition of those in the field. Undoubtedly, the need to move as quickly as possible, without letting oneself be slowed down by ancillary considerations, would explain why certain rules are waived in exceptional circumstances. At the same time, the unconditional search for truth among scientists and concern for ethics would prohibit this. In other words, ethics, validation procedures and scientific integrity are not a luxury of aesthetes that one could bypass in a situation as critical as that caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Needless to say, a science which does not respect the required criteria of rigour would lead to erroneous results which would risk misleading decision-makers and deceiving the population by masking the extent and nature of the danger. So, the communication around the therapeutic effects of certain medical treatments, without tangible scientific proof, has given hope for the existence of a miracle cure to a certain number of people who put themselves in danger to acquire it, and might ...

International audience ; As a preliminary, let us recall, before addressing the questions of ethics and scientific integrity raised by the COVID-19, the astonishment which seized the whole of the French population at beginning of confinement, to the point that we all remained deaf to the warnings issued by our friends in Lombardy, quarantined since February 21, then subjected to confinement which was gradually reinforced the following week, before being extended across Italy, on March 8. Scientific integrity From the beginning of the pandemic, politicians have resorted to a large number of licensed scientists, epidemiologists, data modellers, biologists, doctors, sociologists, etc., to put realistic action plans in place. Taking advantage of the disarray in the population, some charismatic personalities have explained that, in an emergency, we could, or in the name of pragmatism, even had to free ourselves from the rules of research ethics and the usual validation procedures in sciences, to be guided by the intuition of those in the field. Undoubtedly, the need to move as quickly as possible, without letting oneself be slowed down by ancillary considerations, would explain why certain rules are waived in exceptional circumstances. At the same time, the unconditional search for truth among scientists and concern for ethics would prohibit this. In other words, ethics, validation procedures and scientific integrity are not a luxury of aesthetes that one could bypass in a situation as critical as that caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Needless to say, a science which does not respect the required criteria of rigour would lead to erroneous results which would risk misleading decision-makers and deceiving the population by masking the extent and nature of the danger. So, the communication around the therapeutic effects of certain medical treatments, without tangible scientific proof, has given hope for the existence of a miracle cure to a certain number of people who put themselves in danger to acquire it, and might ...

International audience ; As a preliminary, let us recall, before addressing the questions of ethics and scientific integrity raised by the COVID-19, the astonishment which seized the whole of the French population at beginning of confinement, to the point that we all remained deaf to the warnings issued by our friends in Lombardy, quarantined since February 21, then subjected to confinement which was gradually reinforced the following week, before being extended across Italy, on March 8. Scientific integrity From the beginning of the pandemic, politicians have resorted to a large number of licensed scientists, epidemiologists, data modellers, biologists, doctors, sociologists, etc., to put realistic action plans in place. Taking advantage of the disarray in the population, some charismatic personalities have explained that, in an emergency, we could, or in the name of pragmatism, even had to free ourselves from the rules of research ethics and the usual validation procedures in sciences, to be guided by the intuition of those in the field. Undoubtedly, the need to move as quickly as possible, without letting oneself be slowed down by ancillary considerations, would explain why certain rules are waived in exceptional circumstances. At the same time, the unconditional search for truth among scientists and concern for ethics would prohibit this. In other words, ethics, validation procedures and scientific integrity are not a luxury of aesthetes that one could bypass in a situation as critical as that caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Needless to say, a science which does not respect the required criteria of rigour would lead to erroneous results which would risk misleading decision-makers and deceiving the population by masking the extent and nature of the danger. So, the communication around the therapeutic effects of certain medical treatments, without tangible scientific proof, has given hope for the existence of a miracle cure to a certain number of people who put themselves in danger to acquire it, and might ...

Le terme « intelligence artificielle » renvoie au moins à trois choses bien distinctes : une discipline scientifique, les applications de cette discipline, et les craintes de voir une machine prendre son essor de façon indépendante de nous. Nous montrons ici que seules les applications nécessitent d'être contenues et que cela passe par une réflexion et une éthique permanentes.

International audience ; The adjective autonomous is increasingly used in the engineering sector to refer to machines whose behaviour is both unpredictable and efficient. For example, we now talk about cars, robots, weapons, or even autonomous agents. These are regularly in the news because of their novelty and, above all, because of the anxiety they arouse: it is feared that they will emancipate themselves from the guardianship of the men who created them and turn against them. As an illustration, we read in the newspapers that autonomous cars will likely be programmed to sacrifice the lives of their passengers in order to save the lives of the more numerous passers-by who cross at the green light. In a similar but even more worrying vein, open letters signed by tens of thousands of people are calling for a moratorium on autonomous weapons, which are considered to be the third great revolution in the art of warfare after gunpowder and the atomic bomb; in response to this fear, on 12 September 2018 the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the European governments to take a common position to regulate, or even ban, autonomous weapons. All this leads to clarifying what the concept of autonomy means in the technology and in philosophy. ; L'adjectif autonome est de plus en plus souvent employé dans le secteur de l'ingénierie pour désigner des machines dont le comportement se révèle à la fois imprédictible et efficace. Ainsi, parle-ton aujourd'hui de voitures, de robots, d'armes ou même d'agents autonomes. Ceux-ci défraient régulièrement la chronique par leur nouveauté et surtout par l'inquiétude qu'ils suscitent : on craint qu'ils s'émancipent de la tutelle des hommes qui les ont créés et se retournent contre eux. À titre d'illustration, on lit dans les journaux que les voitures autonomes seront vraisemblablement programmées pour sacrifier la vie de leurs passagers afin de sauver celles des passants, plus nombreux, qui traversent malencontreusement au feu vert. Dans un ordre d'idées analogue, mais plus ...

International audience ; The adjective autonomous is increasingly used in the engineering sector to refer to machines whose behaviour is both unpredictable and efficient. For example, we now talk about cars, robots, weapons, or even autonomous agents. These are regularly in the news because of their novelty and, above all, because of the anxiety they arouse: it is feared that they will emancipate themselves from the guardianship of the men who created them and turn against them. As an illustration, we read in the newspapers that autonomous cars will likely be programmed to sacrifice the lives of their passengers in order to save the lives of the more numerous passers-by who cross at the green light. In a similar but even more worrying vein, open letters signed by tens of thousands of people are calling for a moratorium on autonomous weapons, which are considered to be the third great revolution in the art of warfare after gunpowder and the atomic bomb; in response to this fear, on 12 September 2018 the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the European governments to take a common position to regulate, or even ban, autonomous weapons. All this leads to clarifying what the concept of autonomy means in the technology and in philosophy. ; L'adjectif autonome est de plus en plus souvent employé dans le secteur de l'ingénierie pour désigner des machines dont le comportement se révèle à la fois imprédictible et efficace. Ainsi, parle-ton aujourd'hui de voitures, de robots, d'armes ou même d'agents autonomes. Ceux-ci défraient régulièrement la chronique par leur nouveauté et surtout par l'inquiétude qu'ils suscitent : on craint qu'ils s'émancipent de la tutelle des hommes qui les ont créés et se retournent contre eux. À titre d'illustration, on lit dans les journaux que les voitures autonomes seront vraisemblablement programmées pour sacrifier la vie de leurs passagers afin de sauver celles des passants, plus nombreux, qui traversent malencontreusement au feu vert. Dans un ordre d'idées analogue, mais plus ...

En précisant que le terme d'autonomie s'entend à la fois en un sens philosophique et en un sens technologique, on conclut que les Systèmes d'armes létaux autonomes (Sala) ne correspondent pas à une véritable révolution technologique, mais que l'intelligence artificielle renforce l'autonomie des opérateurs.

International audience ; Numerous ethical and societal issues are related to the development of nanotechnology. Among them, the risk for privacy has long been discussed. Some people say that technology is neutral and that it does not really change the nature of problems, which are mainly political, while others state that its contemporary developments considerably amplify them; there are even persons who assert that it will make privacy protection obsolete. This paper discusses those different positions by making reference to the classical Panopticon that is an architecture for surveillance, which characterizes the total absence of privacy. It envisages the possible evolutions of the Panopticon due to the development of nanotechnologies. It shows that the influence of nanotechnology on privacy concerns cannot be dissociated from the influence of computers and biotechnologies, i.e. from what is currently called the NBIC convergence. Lastly, it concludes on the new ethical trade-off that has to be made between three contradictory requirements that are security, transparency and privacy.

International audience ; Numerous ethical and societal issues are related to the development of nanotechnology. Among them, the risk for privacy has long been discussed. Some people say that technology is neutral and that it does not really change the nature of problems, which are mainly political, while others state that its contemporary developments considerably amplify them; there are even persons who assert that it will make privacy protection obsolete. This paper discusses those different positions by making reference to the classical Panopticon that is an architecture for surveillance, which characterizes the total absence of privacy. It envisages the possible evolutions of the Panopticon due to the development of nanotechnologies. It shows that the influence of nanotechnology on privacy concerns cannot be dissociated from the influence of computers and biotechnologies, i.e. from what is currently called the NBIC convergence. Lastly, it concludes on the new ethical trade-off that has to be made between three contradictory requirements that are security, transparency and privacy.