Explore the vast range of titles available.

Looking for ways to handle the transition to a digital economy Robots, artificial intelligence, and driverless cars are no longer things of the distant future. They are with us today and will become increasingly common in coming years, along with virtual reality and digital personal assistants. As these tools advance deeper into everyday use, they raise the question-how will they transform society, the economy, and politics? If companies need fewer workers due to automation and robotics, what happens to those who once held those jobs and don't have the skills for new jobs? And since many social benefits are delivered through jobs, how are people outside the workforce for a lengthy period of time going to earn a living and get health care and social benefits? Looking past today's headlines, political scientist and cultural observer Darrell M. West argues that society needs to rethink the concept of jobs, reconfigure the social contract, move toward a system of lifetime learning, and develop a new kind of politics that can deal with economic dislocations. With the U.S. governance system in shambles because of political polarization and hyper-partisanship, dealing creatively with the transition to a fully digital economy will vex political leaders and complicate the adoption of remedies that could ease the transition pain. It is imperative that we make major adjustments in how we think about work and the social contract in order to prevent society from spiraling out of control. This book presents a number of proposals to help people deal with the transition from an industrial to a digital economy. We must broaden the concept of employment to include volunteering and parenting and pay greater attention to the opportunities for leisure time. New forms of identity will be possible when the \"job\" no longer defines people's sense of personal meaning, and they engage in a broader range of activities. Workers will need help throughout their lifetimes to acquire new skills and develop new job capabilities. Political reforms will be necessary to reduce polarization and restore civility so there can be open and healthy debate about where responsibility lies for economic well-being. This book is an important contribution to a discussion about tomorrow-one that needs to take place today.

In this study, we aim to explain the large disparities among countries and regions on industrial robot application in terms of robot density and robot growth. Based on the premise that people in all cultures have the same potential for innovation, we propose a cross-level lens of cultural tightness-looseness to predict that, in the nascent robotics industry where rules and regulations are underdeveloped (i.e., a loose domain), people in tight cultures (e.g., Singapore, Japan, China) are more likely to innovate than those in loose cultures (e.g., the UK, U.S., the Netherlands) because their creativity is permitted in this or a few other loose domains only. We test this theoretical lens using multi-source longitudinal archival data on robot applications. Several significant findings emerge. First, there is a significant positive relationship between cultural tightness and robot application across 32 countries and territories from 1993 to 2022 (Study 1). Second, such a positive relationship also appears across 50 states in the United States from 1998 to 2022 (Study 2a), and across 31 provinces in China from 2008 to 2022 (Study 2b). Finally, the interaction effect between country- and region-level cultural tightness on robot application is significant (Study 3). These findings provide strong empirical support for our cross-level lens of cultural tightness and shed light on how cultural tightness at different levels interacts to affect incremental innovation (i.e., robot application) in a loose domain (i.e., the robotics industry). Moreover, these findings suggest that loosening tight control on certain domains of a tight culture would remarkably boost creativity and incremental innovation in these domains.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a powerful tool in healthcare significantly impacting practices from diagnostics to treatment delivery and patient management. This article examines the progress of AI in healthcare, starting from the field’s inception in the 1960s to present-day innovative applications in areas such as precision medicine, robotic surgery, and drug development. In addition, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the acceleration of the use of AI in technologies such as telemedicine and chatbots to enhance accessibility and improve medical education is also explored. Looking forward, the paper speculates on the promising future of AI in healthcare while critically addressing the ethical and societal considerations that accompany the integration of AI technologies. Furthermore, the potential to mitigate health disparities and the ethical implications surrounding data usage and patient privacy are discussed, emphasizing the need for evolving guidelines to govern AI’s application in healthcare.

2021 CHOICE Outstanding Academic Title Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare explores the complex relationship between just war theory and the ethics of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). One of the challenges facing ethicists of war, particularly just war theorists, is that AWS is an applicative concept that seems, in many ways, to lie beyond the human(ist) scope of the just war theory tradition. The book examines the various ethical gaps between just war theory and the legal and moral status of AWS, addresses the limits of both traditional and revisionist just war theory, and proposes ways of bridging some of these gaps. It adopts a dualistic notion of moral responsibility-or differing, related notions of moral responsibility and legitimate authority-to study the conflicts and contradictions of legitimizing the autonomous weapons that are designed to secure peace and neutralize the effects of violence. Focusing on the changing conditions and dynamics of accountability, responsibility, autonomy, and rights in twenty-first-century warfare, the volume sheds light on the effects of violence and the future ethics of modern warfare.

Background Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality across U.S. racial/ethnic groups. Existing studies often focus on a particular race/ethnicity or single domain within the care continuum. Granular exploration of disparities among different racial/ethnic groups across the entire colon cancer care continuum is needed. We aimed to characterize differences in colon cancer outcomes by race/ethnicity across each stage of the care continuum. Methods We used the 2010–2017 National Cancer Database to examine differences in outcomes by race/ethnicity across six domains: clinical stage at presentation; timing of surgery; access to minimally invasive surgery; post-operative outcomes; utilization of chemotherapy; and cumulative incidence of death. Analysis was via multivariable logistic or median regression, with select demographics, hospital factors, and treatment details as covariates. Results 326,003 patients (49.6% female, 24.0% non-White, including 12.7% Black, 6.1% Hispanic/Spanish, 1.3% East Asian, 0.9% Southeast Asian, 0.4% South Asian, 0.3% AIAE, and 0.2% NHOPI) met inclusion criteria. Relative to non-Hispanic White patients: Southeast Asian (OR 1.39, p  < 0.01), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.11 p  < 0.01), and Black (OR 1.09, p  < 0.01) patients had increased odds of presenting with advanced clinical stage. Southeast Asian (OR 1.37, p  < 0.01), East Asian (OR 1.27, p  = 0.05), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.05 p  = 0.02), and Black (OR 1.05, p  < 0.01) patients had increased odds of advanced pathologic stage. Black patients had increased odds of experiencing a surgical delay (OR 1.33, p  < 0.01); receiving non-robotic surgery (OR 1.12, p  < 0.01); having post-surgical complications (OR 1.29, p  < 0.01); initiating chemotherapy more than 90 days post-surgery (OR 1.24, p  < 0.01); and omitting chemotherapy altogether (OR 1.12, p  = 0.05). Black patients had significantly higher cumulative incidence of death at every pathologic stage relative to non-Hispanic White patients when adjusting for non-modifiable patient factors ( p  < 0.05, all stages), but these differences were no longer statistically significant when also adjusting for modifiable factors such as insurance status and income. Conclusions Non-White patients disproportionately experience advanced stage at presentation. Disparities for Black patients are seen across the entire colon cancer care continuum. Targeted interventions may be appropriate for some groups; however, major system-level transformation is needed to address disparities experienced by Black patients.

Motivation: The paper examines how organizations speed up the digital transformation of business processes for better customer experience with less exposure to COVID-19. Consistency: Current measures applied to the handling of new COVID-19 waves or other harmful diseases are conformed with the hypothetical after-COVID-19 \"ABCDEF\" effects model. Among most research, all predict digital transformation playing significant roles in \"next normal.\"

Drones have become the controversial new weapon of choice for the US military abroad. Unmanned details the causes and deadly consequences of this terrifying new development in warfare, and explores the implications for international law and global peace. Ann Rogers and John Hill argue that drones represent the first truly globalised technology of war. The book shows how unmanned systems are changing not simply how wars are fought, but the meaning of conflict itself. Providing an unparalleled account of new forms of 21st century imperial warfare, Unmanned shows how drone systems dissolve the conventional obstacles of time and space that have traditionally shaped conflict in the international system. It considers the possibility that these weapons will become normalised in global conflict, raising the spectre of new, unpredictable and unaccountable forms of warfare.

This paper treats the political and ethical issues associated with the new caretaking technologies. Given the number of feminists who have raised serious concerns about the future of care work in the United States, and who have been critical of the degree to which society \"free rides\" on women's caretaking labor, I consider whether technology may provide a solution to this problem. Certainly, if we can create machines and robots to take on particular tasks, we may lighten the care burden that women currently face, much of which is heavy and repetitious, and which results in injury and care \"burnout\" for many ferrude caretakers. Yet, in some contexts, I argue that hightech robotic care may undermine social rehtionships, cutting individuals off from the possibility of social connectedness with others.

Increasingly, the United States has come to rely on the use of drones to counter the threat posed by terrorists. Drones have arguably enjoyed significant successes in denying terrorists safe haven while limiting civilian casualties and protecting U.S. soldiers, but their use has raised ethical concerns. The aim of this article is to explore some of the ethical issues raised by the use of drones using the just war tradition as a foundation. We argue that drones offer the capacity to extend the threshold of last resort for large-scale wars by allowing a leader to act more proportionately on just cause. However, they may be seen as a level of force short of war to which the principle of last resort does not apply; and their increased usage may ultimately raise jus in bello concerns. While drones are technically capable of improving adherence to jus in bello principles of discrimination and proportionality, concerns regarding transparency and the potentially indiscriminate nature of drone strikes, especially those conduced by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), as opposed to the military, may undermine the probability of success in combating terrorism.