In this episode, we explore the vital topic of bias and equity in AI systems. Joining the conversation are two esteemed guests: Raffi Krikorian, Chief Technology Officer at the Emerson Collective, and Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology. Tune in as we unpack the challenges and opportunities in making AI more equitable for all.In this episode, we explore the vital topic of bias and equity in AI systems. Joining the conversation are two esteemed guests: Raffi Krikorian, Chief Technology Officer at the Emerson Collective, and Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology. Tune in as we unpack the challenges and opportunities in making AI more equitable for all.

AI chatbots have quickly taken the world by storm with more people than ever integrating them into their daily lives. Many are familiar with the big name chatbots that can write recipes as Shakespearean poems or summarize obscure topics. But one type of chatbot, AI romantic companions, are less known despite the fact that they fill an especially personal role for their users. For these users, the chatbot developers’ data privacy practices are critical, yet many lack mature privacy and security protocols, leaving users’ most vulnerable data, such as health details, unprotected. ​​ Here to talk about these AI companion companies’ data privacy practices are Jen Caltrider, Mozilla’s *Privacy Not Included Program Director, and Michal Luria, CDT’s own Research Fellow.

More and more people turn to quantified health, achievement, and ability measures, such as fitness apps and economic measures of well-being every single day. As part of this trend, medicalized approaches to human health often describe people in terms of statistics and data, sometimes failing to capture more important details. In particular, the quantified approach falls short in describing the needs and rights of disabled people, as seen in lawsuits and case studies involving algorithmic decision-making about disability benefits. Here to talk about algorithmic decision-making and quantification in disability benefits in the United States and India are Vandana Chaudhry, Associate Professor in the Department of Social Work and Disability Studies at the City University of New York who focuses on disability and digital justice in the Global South, and Lydia X.Z. Brown, activist for disability justice, Director of Public Policy at the National Disability Institute, and CDT’s very own former policy counsel.

New internet-based technologies have boomed with unprecedented access to data and data management tools. While this has facilitated innovation, it has also left many personal users and companies alike with limited knowledge about the uses and potential harms of their data. Balancing innovation and data privacy often requires tailored approaches, which is what the National Institute of Standards and Technology, more commonly known as NIST, attempted to address with their now highly-relied upon voluntary Privacy Framework, which offers guidance for organizations to voluntarily implement to protect data privacy and security.

It’s a modern day reality that large social media platforms deliver political information to many citizens, making these companies’ policies for removing and blocking speech critical to politics and culture. Emergencies such as the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol and the genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar can be traced in part to misinformation and hate speech shared online via large social media platforms. The problem of how social media companies should create policies to govern these spaces makes them uniquely quasi-governmental, a role, still developing today.

Recently, legislative bodies across the United States have exploded as lawmakers in over 10 states introduced several closely related bills to tackle AI- systems and their impacts on various facets of society. From hiring practices to education, insurance, housing, lending, government services, and even criminal sentencing, the scope of these bills is vast and far-reaching and will likely have a rippling effect across the country. Here to talk about these systems and the decisions they are responsible for making. Grace Gedye, Policy Analyst for Consumer Reports, and Matt Scherer, Senior Policy Counsel for CDT.

In recent years, differential privacy has emerged as a promising solution for enhancing privacy protections in data processing systems. However, beneath its seemingly robust framework lie certain assumptions that, if left unquestioned, could inadvertently undermine its efficacy in safeguarding individual privacy. Here to discuss their recent papers on differential privacy is Rachel Cummings, Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research at Columbia University and CDT Non-Resident Fellow and Daniel Susser, Associate Professor for the Department of Information Science at Cornell University and CDT Non-Resident Fellow.

On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton, two pivotal cases that could alter the landscape of free expression on the internet. In this episode, we sat down with CDT’s Director of the Free Expression Project, Kate Ruane, and Vice President of the Center for Civil Rights and Technology, K.J. Bagchi to discuss the two cases that are challenging the constitutionality of the controversial Texas and Florida social media laws.

In today's episode, we’ll delve into the exciting realm of Artificial Intelligence, and its transformative impact on education. The recent strides in AI have reignited curiosity about its potential to enhance learning experiences. However, it's essential to recognize that AI encompasses a diverse array of methods, capabilities, and limitations. Join us as we navigate through the nuances often overlooked by researchers, education technology firms, and other developers in the AI landscape. Here to discuss what this means and share insights from his paper, “Unpacking the "Black Box" of AI in Education”, is Nabeel Gillani, CDT Non-Resident Fellow and Assistant Professor of Design and Data Analysis at Northeastern University.

Back in 2018, CDT’s own, Mallory Knodel, teamed up with Niels ten Oever from the critical infrastructure lab at the University of Amsterdam to present a draft document at the internet standards governing body called the Internet Engineering Task Force, or IETF. This draft outlined a proposal that urged the community to officially reject the use of discriminatory and exclusive language in Internet Drafts and RFCs. As we persistently uncover and confront systemic racial inequality across society, it becomes equally vital to guarantee that the fundamental design comprising one of our most critical and democratic technologies– the internet– is devoid of any historically racist or prejudiced terms.

CDT’s Tech Talk is a podcast where we dish on tech and Internet policy, while also explaining what these policies mean to our daily lives. You can find Tech Talk on Spotify, SoundCloud, iTunes, and Google Podcasts, as well as Stitcher and TuneIn. Recently, the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Board released a comprehensive report on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly called FISA 702. FISA 702 is a warrantless surveillance authority that was first established in 2008. It empowers the government to designate foreigners abroad as surveillance targets and to compel communication service providers in the US to turn over their communications without court approval. Unless renewed by Congress, FISA 702 is set to expire at the end of the year and is facing serious scrutiny from Democrats and Republicans alike. In this episode, Sharon Bradford Franklin, Chair of the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, will explain why CDT and other groups across the political spectrum have been calling for serious reforms to Section 702.