Trump Selling Bibles
Sarah Cooper How To Bible
ETHICS GONE MISSING
GQP Jim Inhofe, who called Covid a “hoax”, retired DUE TO LONG COVID
John Eastman was just disbarred for trying to overthrow the govt for Trump
Guess whom he clerked for at the Supreme Court? Clarence Thomas
Guess who he colluded with to overturn the election? Ginni Thomas
ChristoFascist Supreme Court is a stinking corpse of its once great self
Sam Bankman Fried Got 25 years for scamming investors.
When does D☭Иald TЯUM₽ go to prison for doing the same thing?
Internet Ethics @IEthics
LAION-5B, Stable Diffusion 1.5, and the Original Sin of Generative AI
“Artificial Intelligence systems may be a black box, but the human decisions that go into building and deploying them are crystal clear. Deploying and automating an unaccountable machine is a management and design decision”:
Stanford Internet Observatory’s David Thiel — building on crucial prior work by researchers including Dr. Abeba Birhane — recently confirmed more than 1,000 URLS containing verified Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) is buried within LAION-5B, the training dataset for Stable Diffusion 1.5, an AI image tool that transformed photography and illustration in 2023. Stable Diffusion is an open source model, and it is a foundational component for thousands of the image generating tools found across apps and websites.
The presence of this material in AI training data points to an ongoing negligence of the AI data pipeline. This crisis is partly the result of who policymakers talk with and allow to define AI: too often, it is industry experts who have a vested interest in deterring attention from the role of training data, and the facts of what lies within it. As with Omelas, we each face a decision of what to do now that we know these facts.
BTC LIVE
“#Apple Sued Over #AirTags #Privacy”:
https://cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-sued-over-airtags-privacy-everything-you-need-to-know/ #ethics #law #tech
FASCINATING AI PAPER ALERT: “Anthropomorphising machines and computerising minds: the crosswiring of languages between Artificial Intelligence and Brain & Cognitive Sciences” by
@Floridi
&
@KiaNobre
. Interesting quotes:
“AI scientists speak of ‘machine learning,’ for example. The term was coined (or perhaps popularised, the debate seems open) by Arthur Samuel in 1959 to refer to ‘the development and study of statistical algorithms that can learn from data and generalize to new data, and thus perform tasks without explicit instructions.’ But this ‘learning’ does not mean what brain and cognitive scientists mean by the same term when referring to how humans or animals acquire new behaviours or mental contents, or modify existing ones, as a result of experiences in the environment.” (page 2)
–
“The phenomenon of AI’s conceptual borrowing from BCS (brain and cognitive sciences) has been growing since the work of Alan Turing (Turing 1950), who influentially drew parallels to human intelligence and behaviour to conceptualise how machines might eventually mimic some aspects of biological cognition. But, perhaps the most problematic borrowing came with the generation of the label of the field itself: ‘Artificial Intelligence.’ John McCarthy was responsible for the brilliant, if misleading, idea. It was a marketing move, and, as he recounted, things could have gone differently” (page 5)
–
“What can be done to tackle this conceptual mess? Probably nothing in terms of linguistic reform. Languages, including technical ones, are like immense social currents: nobody can swim against them successfully, and they cannot be contained or directed by fiat. AI and BCS will keep using their terms, no matter how misleading they may be, how many resources they will make one waste, and how much damage they may cause in the wrong hands or contexts.” (page 10)
➡️ The paper is an excellent exploration of the intersection between AI, philosophy, and human cognitive neuroscience. Link below.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4738331