arXiv subjects

Lin Kyi

Publications and source records attributed to Lin Kyi.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

When Feasibility of Fairness Audits Relies on Willingness to Share Data: Examining User Acceptance of Multi-Party Computation Protocols for Fairness Monitoring

Fairness monitoring is critical for detecting algorithmic bias, as mandated by the EU AI Act. Since such monitoring requires sensitive user data (e.g., ethnicity), the AI Act permits its processing only with strict privacy measures, such as multi-party computation (MPC), in compliance with the GDPR. However, the effectiveness of such secure monitoring protocols ultimately depends on people's willingness to share their data. Little is known about how different MPC protocol designs shape user acceptance. To address this, we conducted an online survey with 833 participants in Europe, examining user acceptance of various MPC protocol designs for fairness monitoring. Findings suggest that users prioritized risk-related attributes (e.g., privacy protection mechanism) in direct evaluation but benefit-related attributes (e.g., fairness objective) in simulated choices, with acceptance shaped by their fairness and privacy orientations. We derive implications for deploying and communicating privacy-preserving protocols in ways that foster informed consent and align with user expectations.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

From Clicks to Consensus: Collective Consent Assemblies for Data Governance

Obtaining meaningful and informed consent from users is essential for ensuring autonomy and control over one's data. Notice and consent, the standard for collecting consent, has been criticized. While other individualized solutions have been proposed, this paper argues that a collective approach to consent is worth exploring. First, individual consent is not always feasible to collect for all data collection scenarios. Second, harms resulting from data processing are often communal in nature, given the interconnected nature of some data. Finally, ensuring truly informed consent for every individual has proven impractical. We propose collective consent, operationalized through consent assemblies, as one alternative framework. We establish collective consent's theoretical foundations and use speculative design to envision consent assemblies leveraging deliberative mini-publics. We present two vignettes: i) replacing notice and consent, and ii) collecting consent for GenAI model training. Our paper employs future backcasting to identify the requirements for realizing collective consent and explores its potential applications in contexts where individual consent is infeasible.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Turning to Online Forums for Legal Information: A Case Study of GDPR's Legitimate Interests

Practitioners building online services and tools often turn to online forums such as Reddit, Law Stack Exchange, and Stack Overflow for legal guidance to ensure compliance with the GDPR. The legal information presented in these forums directly impacts present-day industry practitioner's decisions. Online forums can serve as gateways that, depending on the accuracy and quality of the answers provided, may either support or undermine the protection of privacy and data protection fundamental rights. However, there is a need for deeper investigation into practitioners' decision-making processes and their understanding of legal compliance when seeking for legal information online. Using GDPR's ``legitimate interests'' legal ground for processing personal data as a case study, we investigate how practitioners use online forums to identify common areas of confusion in applying legitimate interests in practice, and evaluate how legally sound online forum responses are. Our analysis found that applying the legal basis of legitimate interest is complex for practitioners, with important implications for how the GDPR is implemented in practice. The legal analysis showed that crowdsourced legal information tends to be legally sound, though sometimes incomplete. We outline recommendations to improve the quality of online forums by ensuring that responses are more legally sound and comprehensive, enabling practitioners to apply legitimate interests effectively in practice and uphold the GDPR.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Governance of Generative AI in Creative Work: Consent, Credit, Compensation, and Beyond

Since the emergence of generative AI, creative workers have spoken up about the career-based harms they have experienced arising from this new technology. A common theme in these accounts of harm is that generative AI models are trained on workers' creative output without their consent and without giving credit or compensation to the original creators. This paper reports findings from 20 interviews with creative workers in three domains: visual art and design, writing, and programming. We investigate the gaps between current AI governance strategies, what creative workers want out of generative AI governance, and the nuanced role of creative workers' consent, compensation and credit for training AI models on their work. Finally, we make recommendations for how generative AI can be governed and how operators of generative AI systems might more ethically train models on creative output in the future.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

"It doesn't tell me anything about how my data is used'': User Perceptions of Data Collection Purposes

Data collection purposes and their descriptions are presented on almost all privacy notices under the GDPR, yet there is a lack of research focusing on how effective they are at informing users about data practices. We fill this gap by investigating users' perceptions of data collection purposes and their descriptions, a crucial aspect of informed consent. We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with European users to investigate user perceptions of six common purposes (Strictly Necessary, Statistics and Analytics, Performance and Functionality, Marketing and Advertising, Personalized Advertising, and Personalized Content) and identified elements of an effective purpose name and description. We found that most purpose descriptions do not contain the information users wish to know, and that participants preferred some purpose names over others due to their perceived transparency or ease of understanding. Based on these findings, we suggest how the framing of purposes can be improved toward meaningful informed consent.

cs.HC↗