Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
yasmin_discussions-request@ntlab.gr
You can reach the person managing the list at
yasmin_discussions-owner@ntlab.gr
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Yasmin_discussions digest..."
THIS IS THE YASMIN-DISCUSSIONS DIGEST
Today's Topics:
1. dangerous art and dangerous science (YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 09:50:59 +0200
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] dangerous art and dangerous science
Message-ID:
<mailman.8.1562745214.33654.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
yasminers
we have a few new members who have joined the yasmin art/sci/tech village
let me encourage all new members to send in a short email introducing themselves
and their interests. In a healthy village when you meet a new person
on the street, you do this!
Meanwhile - i hope other members will join in the discussion on ai and
ethics/dangerous art
I would like to add to the discussion soup that AI is indeed
potentially dangerous but in terry irwin
's language we have not done deep transition design- and expected,
predictable, negative aspects are being
addressed too late- major instutions are only now setting up programs
on AI and ethics (eg MIT), when this should have been started 25 years
ago at least.
As an astrophysist i am aware of the growing impact on the way that
science is done, with the use of AI beings actually being the ones
making the discovery and not the human being. In the 'normal' way of
doing science one can talk to the scientist and ask probing questions
about the methodology, validity of the verification, implicit biaises.
Unfortunately scientists now admit that the discovery is made by the
AI, but its impossible to interrogate the AI scientist rigorously. At
what point does the AI scientist become an actual co author. And when
the work done by the AI is found to be erroneous, then the AI
scientist retracts the paper and the university dismisses the AI
scientist for academic fraud ? I have been using this line of argument
to push that we start transition redesigning of science so we can
anticipate and mitigate the predictable 'dangerous science' that will
result when we accept as fact scientific results and the humans cannot
validate or confirm the result. How can you replicate a scientific
experiment or analysis when the AI being is unable to explain what
they did. Judge John Marshall of Dallas Texas, who worked on the early
apollo program, has been trying to argue that the same problem is now
arising frequently in legal cases where AI is being used to analyse
the evidence and recommend a verdict, but it is impossible to
cross-examine the witness as is normal in court. These are all
anticipatable dangers.
Similarly we now see videos of artificial beings that are
indistinguishable on video from the real persons activity that has
been edited using ai techniques. Such as the videos now circulating of
famous people saying things they never said themselves , but the AI
being, an animated X, is totally believable. These techniques were
developed by members of the art and technology village. Dangerous art
indeed.
Maybe the yasmin villagers have some suggestions of how we go forward
in the age of dangerous art and dangerous science.
Roger is in Paris
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
https://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr
------------------------------
End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1
*************************************************
