My work
Meus trabalhos
Resumo
A Coletânea de Manuais de Direito Digital foi elaborada para que todos os Universitários possam ter acesso a uma das mais dinâmicas áreas do Direito e vislumbrar um mundo novo; quando o Direito e as tecnologias se combinam, exigindo dos estudiosos do direito, uma compreensão além das leis. A compreensão do mundo digital tornou-se imprescindível para qualquer jurista que almeje sucesso em sua carreira uma vez que as novas tecnologias vieram mudar a forma como vivemos nosso cotidiano e transformando nossos horizontes.
Obras da colação Manual de Direito Digital: Médico Manual de Direito Digital: Consumidor Manual de Direito Digital: Comercial Manual de Direito Digital: Processual Manual de Direito Digital: Trabalho Manual de Direito Digital: Fiscal Manual de Direito Digital: Administrativo Manual de Direito Digital: Constitucional e Ambiental Manual de Direito Digital: Penal e Internacional
Todos os dias somos surpreendidos pelos avanços das tecnologias que nos obrigam a estar sempre atualizados, reinventando as mais diversas áreas da vida, fazendo-nos adaptar e inovar nossos costumes e parâmetros legais através de normas que conseguem regular não só os avanços, mas toda essa "nova" era da tecnologia que tanto apreciamos e tememos. Sob um regime de dignidade de dados, as tecnologias desenvolvidas nas últimas décadas nos confrontaram com um mundo radicalmente novo, cheio de questões e significados éticos.
Com a Sociedade da Informação e as Mídias Sociais, a Realidade Virtual e a Realidade Aumentada (Realidade Estendida - XR), a Gamificação da Vida, os Padrões de Direitos Humanos e o Direito à Privacidade tornaram-se protagonistas do Metaverso vs. Do ponto de vista do Transhumanismo, a inteligência artificial um dia ultrapassará a inteligência humana, percebendo a singularidade tecnológica, conjecturada no desenvolvimento da civilização, em que o progresso tecnológico acelera para além da capacidade de compreender e prever os seres humanos.
Neste trabalho, discutiremos seu desenvolvimento e seus efeitos sobre o atual modelo de sociedade constituído por pessoas humanas.
Resumo
Livros
Books
Desinformação x Liberdade de Expressão: A Moderação de Conteúdo pelas Mídias Sociais
Police Papers
Artigos
Blog
The Role of Subjective Risk Assessment in Shaping Users' perception of Privacy Threats: a Cross-national Approach
It is globally recognized that the algorithm risk assessment approach is the key in regulating automated systems. Companies are obligated under transparency laws to evaluate and document the impact of their algorithms, promoting accountability and minimizing negative effects on individuals. However, a lack of clear classification and definition of low or high-risk applications in the laws makes the assessment difficult. Clear thresholds for high-risk automated systems are therefore necessary for future guidance.
It is worrisome that the companies in charge of handling personal data and providing Artificial Intelligence systems (AI systems) are the ones deciding the level of risk involved. Studies have shown that the industry-generated risk matrices used for assessing risk are subjective and not objective.[1] These matrices are biased tools that translate probability and values into likelihood and consequence judgments, instead of using objective number grids.[2] Research by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky has shown that human cognitive bias plays a role in this subjectivity. By applying these biases to the risk matrix, we can hypothesize that risk point placement may be biased.[3]
The challenge becomes more complex when cultural aspects are taken into account. The Brussels Effect is a widely recognized phenomenon. While European Union Regulations are being used as a model for data protection worldwide, they can have adverse effects if cultural differences are not considered. This is a significant concern because users' perception of privacy threats online and their privacy-protective behavior varies depending on the culture in which they live.[4]
There are various interpretations of cross-cultural differences in privacy management, considering the benefits and risks of disclosing personal information. Recent studies propose that government privacy regulation policies may play a significant role in shaping individuals' privacy attitudes and behavior.[5] The Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory argues that government privacy policies may affect how sensitive individuals become towards their own privacy, and this can be reflected in their privacy behavior.[6] Therefore, political systems and privacy regulation on a governmental level may influence a national culture on personal privacy management.[7]
When regulations delegate the power to private companies to determine the risks involved in processing personal data, it gives them control over the individual self-determination that the law intended to protect. As a result, the biased risk assessments made by these companies may influence how individuals view their privacy and behave toward the classification of data processing risks. On the other hand, with data protection as a universal right and the Digital Laws Brussels Effect being evident, subjective risk assessment may be necessary to determine the risks involved in personal data processing while considering the subjectivity of the level of privacy violation perception in different cultures.
Therefore, considering that individuals balance their desired level of privacy using a rule-based system, they perceive their information as private when they own it and decide who can access it.[8] Hence, should be important to acknowledge personal data risk as an individual's right. This approach could aid in minimizing any biases that may arise during the risk assessment process.
Bibliografia
[1] Eric D. Smith, ‘Risk Analysis and Mitigation Tendencies as Interpreted by Cognitive Science’ RIMES: Research Institute for Manufacturing and Engineering Systems IMSE: Industrial, Manufacturing & Systems Engineering Department University of Texas at El Paso
[2] Ibid
[3] D. Kahneman, and A. Tversky, ‘Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk’ Econometrica 46(2) (1979), 171-185 < https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185> Acceded 3 November 2023
[4] German Neubaum, Miriam Metzger, Nicole Krämer, and Elias Kyewski, ‘How subjective norms relate to personal privacy regulation in social media: A cross-national approach’ Social Media+ Society 9.3 (2023) < https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/20563051231182365> Acceded 3 November 2023
[5] Ibid
[6] Sandra Petronio, ‘Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure’ Suny Press (2002)
[7] Neubaum, Metzger, Krämer, and Kyewski (n 4)
[8] Petronio (n 6)