Digital justice: Reflected in the “Black Mirror”

Timur M. Khusyain­ov
Nation­al Research Uni­ver­si­ty High­er School of Eco­nom­ics

Dig­i­tal jus­tice: Reflect­ed in the “Black Mir­ror”

Abstract. This remark for the ”Black Mir­ror” phi­los­o­phy dis­cus­sion con­sid­ers the trans­for­ma­tions of the pun­ish­ment sys­tem based on the tech­no­log­i­cal devel­op­ment per­spec­tives pre­sent­ed in the “Black Mir­ror” series. The state, by intro­duc­ing cer­tain laws, seeks to lim­it the actions of per­sons, cre­at­ing for them a cer­tain frame of behav­ior; more­over, it seeks not only to define the lim­its of what is per­mit­ted, but also to ensure that the per­son does not vio­late them. Mod­ern dig­i­tal tech­nolo­gies can pro­vide an oppor­tu­ni­ty not only to mon­i­tor com­pli­ance with all exist­ing rules, but also to make deci­sions about pun­ish­ment and even to imple­ment them. At the same time, unlike in the past, per­sons might be safe not only from any phys­i­cal pun­ish­ment, but also from any exclu­sion from the usu­al phys­i­cal space. They may go on liv-ing in their homes, walk­ing along the streets – how­ev­er, at the same time they are expe­ri­enc­ing an exclu­sion from soci­ety: being phys­i­cal­ly close to oth­er peo­ple, they can no longer con­tact them. The ques­tion is posed of what con­se­quences for the indi­vid­ual and soci­ety such a trans­for­ma­tion of pun­ish­ments might have. 

Key­words: pun­ish­ment sys­tem, “Black Mir­ror”, phi­los­o­phy of tech­nol­o­gy, tech­no-ethics, crime, pun­ish­ment, jus­tice

DOI: 10.5840/dspl2019217

The report­ed study was fund­ed by RFBR with­in the research project №18–011-00335


  1. AI: Algo­rithms and Jus­tice, The Berk­man Klein Cen­ter for Inter­net & Soci­ety at Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty, Decem­ber 10, 2018. Avail­able at: (accessed on Feb­ru­ary 15, 2019).
  2. Joshi, S. An Indi­an Artist Vis­it­ed Pak­istan to Make Street Art on Fear­less­ness // Mash­able, Decem­ber 14, 2015. Avail­able at: (accessed on Feb­ru­ary 15, 2019).
  3. Kuty­rov, V.A. Tekhnol­o­gizat­siya guman­i­tarno-pravovoy sfery obshch­est­va v svete filosofii [Tech­nol­o­giza­tion of the Society’s Human­i­tar­i­an and Legal Areas in Philo­soph­i­cal Con­text], Yuridich­eskaya nau­ka i prak­ti­ka: Vest­nik Nizhe­gorod­skoy akademii MVD Rossii, 2018, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 289–291. (In Russ­ian)
  4. Pak, G.S., Husyain­ov, T.M. Emot­sion­al­nyj kon­trol i etich­eskie prob­le­my pro­fes­sion­al­noj dey­atel­nos­ti [Emo­tion­al Con­trol and Eth­i­cal Prob­lems of Pro­fes­sion­al Activ­i­ty], Guman­i­tarnye vedo­mosti TGPU im. L.N. Tol­sto­go, 2018, no 2, pp. 43–54. (In Russ­ian)
  5. Pri­val­ov, A. Iskusstven­nyj intellekt nauchilsya vynosit prigov­ory [Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence Learned to Pass Sen­tences], Pop­ul­yarnaya mekhani­ka, May 10, 2017. Avail­able at: (accessed on Feb­ru­ary 15, 2019). (In Russ­ian)
  6. Sot­sial­naya filosofiya nau­ki. Idei i diskus­sii [Social Phi­los­o­phy of Sci­ence. Ideas and Dis­cus­sions]: mono­graph / ed. by I.T. Kasavin, T.D. Sokolo­va. Moscow: Russkoe obshch­est­vo istorii i filosofii nauk Publ., 2018. 254 pp. Avail­able at: (In Russ­ian)
  7. Tashea, J. Courts Are Using AI to Sen­tence Crim­i­nals. That Must Stop Now, Wired, April 17, 2017. Avail­able at: (accessed on Feb­ru­ary 15, 2019).
  8. Zakirov, R. Pochemu v Ger­manii pobeg iz tyurmy ne yavlyaet­sya neza­kon­nym [Why Jail­break in Ger­many Is Not Ille­gal],, June 3, 2014. Avail­able at: (accessed on Feb­ru­ary 15, 2019). (In Russ­ian)

Comments are closed.