Hello all! As mentioned in my previous post, I got married last week. Between my wedding and the honeymoon, I did not read a lot of new stuff (except for advancing on some of my ongoing long reads). So, this set of recommendations will be even sparser than usual.
Papers Oliver Haimson et al.. 2020 forthcoming. Designing Trans Technology. Accepted to CHI ‘20, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA.
Hello, all! This week’s reading were somewhat narrow in scope, as I had to finish some writing projects and application before my marriage leave next week.
Papers Joanna J Bryson and Andras Theodorou. 2019. How Society Can Maintain Human-Centric Artificial Intelligence. Human-Centered Digitalization and Services, edited by M. Toivonen and E. Saari, Translational Systems Sciences 19, Springer Nature Singapore.
Shows that centering AI on human needs and interests is not only desirable but technically feasible.
This week’s post is a little late, as my house spent most of yesterday without power. So, here come the usual comments on texts.
Papers Ann-Sophie Barwich. 2019. The Value of Failure in Science: The Story of Grandmother Cells in Neuroscience. Frontiers in Neuroscience 13.
Provides an interesting analysis of the concept of a grandmother cell and its empirical and conceptual shortcomings, but, more importantly, makes a solid case for the importance of studying scientific failures.
In this week, most of my readings were directed towards two goals: finishing a grant application (on a theme not covered by the recommendations below) and becoming acquainted with some technical literature that is relevant for my research interests: while I don’t work directly with human-computer interaction, competition law, or the economics of AI, understanding what is going on in those subjects is relevant for discussing AI regulation. I also managed to squeeze in some leisure reads, which could be of interest.
Once more unto the breach…this week has not been very productive for my reading goals: I spent most of my time writing, and re-reading the stuff I needed for writing, and so there were few new things.
Books Geoffroy de Lagasnerie. 2013 . A Última Lição de Michel Foucault [soon to be released in English as Foucault Against Neoliberalism?]. São Paulo: Três Estrelas.
Why did Foucault dedicate an entire course to what is usually called “neoliberalism”?
Hello! This week was a bit less productive in terms of reading, both because some deadlines led to more focused interaction with texts and because some of the texts I read in full this week were not that interesting. Still, there were some interesting texts, and I hope my first impressions convey part of what’s good about them.
Books Alberto Cupani. 2017. Filosofia da Tecnologia: Um Convite [Philosophy of Technology: an invitation].
Happy new year, everybody! As part of my efforts to blog more than once in a decade, I have decided to try and write weekly posts about my long reads (usually books or academic papers, but might also include journalistic stuff, etc.). Each text should get a small description of its contents and some impressions, but particularly thought-provoking pieces might warrant a post about them.
With any luck, my lists will provide interesting suggestions to readers with similar interests.
The final week of the “Rethinking International Tax Law” course goes beyond the technical aspects of tax planning previously discussed, exploring those practices from an ethical perspective. To achieve that goal, the lecture videos consist of interviews, made in March and April 2015, with stakeholders in the tax planning debate, where they present their positions and what they perceive as key ethical issues.
The OECD perspective Pascal Saint-Amans The first interviewee is Pascal Saint-Amans, Director of the Centre for Tax Policy and Administration at the OECD.
Week 5 presents the actions taken within the European Union to neutralise the effects of international tax planning by multinationals. It also discusses how EU law and rulings from the European Court of Justice may limit domestic and international initiatives for countering tax planning practices.
The stated goals of EU policy include acheiving the “four freedoms”: free movement of goods, services, persons and capital within the internal market. It also aims to produce a level playing field within that market and harmonise national laws.
Week 4 concerns itself with transfer pricing techniques used to allocate the profit made by a group of companies to the individual group members. Barnhouse et al. (2012) present a definition of transfer price as
the price an organization must charge or pay to transfer goods from one subsidiary or internal branch to another segment of the same organization.
Transfer prices are relevant for companies that operate within a single country, as they transfer products between subsidiaries, but the factors involved in transfer pricing calculations involving multinational enterprises (MNEs) involve many additional factors, since governments are entitled to adjusting the prices on international transfers according to the arm’s length principle.