April 2019 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Brookings Report: "Credit denial in the age of AI"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Report <https://www.brookings.edu/search/?post_type=research> Credit denial in the age of AI Aaron Klein <https://www.brookings.edu/experts/aaron-klein/> Thursday, April 11, 2019 *Editor's Note:* /This report is part of "//A Blueprint for the Future of AI <https://www.brookings.edu/series/a-blueprint-for-the-future-of-ai/>//," a series from the Brookings Institution that analyzes the new challenges and potential policy solutions introduced by artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies./ Banks have been in the business of deciding who is eligible for credit for centuries. But in the age of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and big data, digital technologies have the potential to transform credit allocation in positive as well as negative directions. Given the mix of possible societal ramifications, policymakers must consider what practices are and are not permissible and what legal and regulatory structures are necessary to protect consumers against unfair or discriminatory lending practices. In this paper, I review the history of credit and the risks of discriminatory practices. I discuss how AI alters the dynamics of credit denials and what policymakers and banking officials can do to safeguard consumer lending. AI has the potential to alter credit practices in transformative ways and it is important to ensure that this happens in a safe and prudent manner. […] Continua qui: https://www.brookings.edu/research/credit-denial-in-the-age-of-ai/

April 16, 2019

Programming for the Expression of Ideas

by Giacomo Tesio

https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Expression-of-Ideas The computer revolution is a revolution in the way we think and in the way we express what we think.

April 16, 2019

Former Mozilla exec: Google has sabotaged Firefox for years

by Giacomo Tesio

https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has-sabotaged-fire… Johnathan Nightingale, a former General Manager and Vice President of the Firefox group at Mozilla, described these issues as "oopses." "When I started at Mozilla in 2007 there was no Google Chrome, and most folks we spoke with inside [Google] were Firefox fans," Nightingale recollected in a Twitter thread on Saturday. "When Chrome launched things got complicated, but not in the way you might expect. They had a competing product now, but they didn't cut ties, break our search deal - nothing like that. In fact, the story we kept hearing was, 'We're on the same side. We want the same things'," the former Mozilla exec said. "I think our friends inside Google genuinely believed that. At the individual level, their engineers cared about most of the same things we did. Their product and design folks made many decisions very similarly, and we learned from watching each other. "But Google as a whole is very different than individual googlers," Nightingale said. "Google Chrome ads started appearing next to Firefox search terms. Gmail & [Google] Docs started to experience selective performance issues and bugs on Firefox. Demo sites would falsely block Firefox as 'incompatible'," he said. "All of this is stuff you're allowed to do to compete, of course. But we were still a search partner, so we'd say 'hey what gives?' And every time, they'd say, 'oops. That was accidental. We'll fix it in the next push in 2 weeks.' "Over and over. Oops. Another accident. We'll fix it soon. We want the same things. We're on the same team. There were dozens of oopses. Hundreds maybe?" "I'm all for 'don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence' but I don't believe Google is that incompetent. I think they were running out the clock. We lost users during every oops. And we spent effort and frustration every clock tick on that instead of improving our product. We got outfoxed for a while and by the time we started calling it what it was, a lot of damage had been done," Nightingale said. [...] In July 2018, Mozilla Program Manager Chris Peterson accused Google of intentionally slowing down YouTube performance on Firefox. He revealed that both Firefox and Edge were superior when loading YouTube content when compared to Chrome, and in order to counteract this performance issue, Google switched to using a JavaScript library for YouTube that they knew wasn't supported by Firefox.

April 16, 2019

Amazon Workers Are Listening In on Amazon Echo Users - The Atlantic

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Behind Every Robot Is a Human Why Amazon workers sometimes listen in on users’ conversations with Alexa, and what it tells us about the technology that powers “smart” devices SIDNEY FUSSELL APR 15, 2019 https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/04/amazon-workers-eaves… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 16, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Stefano Quintarelli

ho letto l'articolo, ed anche living within lmits, immigration dilemma - avoiding the tragedy of the commons e, sul fronte opposto, governing the commons. cmq. trovo che l'idea iniziale sia tanto aprezzabile quanto l'evoluzione del suo pensiero sia semplicistico fino a divenire esecrabile. (come ad esempio quando ritiene che l'universalismo sia un errore e che ci voglia un altruismo discriminatorio per cui lo stato che ha dei problemi si deve arrangiare) pero' magari mi ricordo male... in the immigration mdilemma fa un esempio sul fatto che in una assicurazione, quando tutti sono assicurati, l'assicurazione diventa uno commons ed i manager devono stare attenti ad evitare sfruttamenti indebiti - ovvero devono gestire il commons (letto al volo da una delle orcchiete fatte ad una pagina, mica mi ricordo tutto, eh ;-) ciao!, s. On 15/04/2019 19:17, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > ma hai letto l’articolo di Hardin, Stefano? > I tuoi commenti mi inducono a sospettare di no. > > Hardin infatti in maniera assolutamente apodittica > scrive che i commons non possono funzionare - punto. > > jc > > > > (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > >> On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >> >> non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" >> >> su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. >> anche 2+2=4... >> >> ciao, s. >> >>> On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>> lui non disse: “senza management”. >>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>>> >>>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>>> no ? >>>> >>>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>>> April 23, 2019 >>>>> * >>>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> nexa mailing list >>>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>>> >>>> -- >>>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >> >> -- >> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it > -- reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Alberto Cammozzo

Sull'argomento ha già scritto egregiamente Elinor Ostrom, che tanto ha lavorato proprio sulla gestione dei commons. Ad esempio: Ostrom, Elinor. “Coping with Tragedies of the Commons.” /Annual Review of Political Science/ 2, no. 1 (June 1999): 493–535. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.493. <https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.493> Ciao, Alberto On 15/04/2019 19:48, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > faccio però presente che è proprio > il superamento (o, se volete, l’arricchimento) della dicotomia proprietà pubblica o priorità privata > che è alla base del concetto di “commons”. > > E Hardin lì proprio non ci arriva. > > jc > > > (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > >> On 15 Apr 2019, at 19:33, Enrico Nardelli <nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it> wrote: >> >> >> Scusate se mi intrometto, ma spinto dalla curiosità, prima della mia precedente risposta avevo letto (ammetto, velocemente) l'articolo originale di Hardin, ed avevo notatno che contiene questo passaggio (alla fine del paragrafo "Tragedy of Freedom in a Commons") >> >> ---- >> What shall we do? We have several options. We might sell them off as private property. We might keep them as public property, but allocate the right to enter them. The allocation might be on the basis of wealth, by the use of an auction system. It might be on the basis of merit, as defined by some agreed-upon standards. It might be by lottery. Or it might be on a first-come, first-served basis, administered to long queues. These, I think, are all the reasonable possibilities. They are all objectionable. But we must choose--or acquiesce in the destruction of the commons that we call our National Parks. >> ---- >> >> Non mi sembra che sia una preclusione assoluta ad un possibile regolazione. Anzi, invoca una qualche forma di regolazione dei commons, pena la loro distruzione. In altre parole, mi pare che dica che i commons non possono funzionare (cioè saranno distrutti) se non si decidono delle regole. >> >> Poi, come ha giustamente osservato l'altro Stefano (Zacchiroli), c'è chi ha usato questa posizione per sostenere che la scelta è la privatizzazione dei beni comuni, ma questa è un'altra storia... >> >> Ciao, Enrico >> >> >> >> Il 15/04/2019 19:17, J.C. DE MARTIN ha scritto: >>> ma hai letto l’articolo di Hardin, Stefano? >>> I tuoi commenti mi inducono a sospettare di no. >>> Hardin infatti in maniera assolutamente apodittica >>> scrive che i commons non possono funzionare - punto. >>> jc >>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>>> >>>> non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" >>>> >>>> su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. >>>> anche 2+2=4... >>>> >>>> ciao, s. >>>> >>>>> On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>>> lui non disse: “senza management”. >>>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>>>>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>>>>> no ? >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>>>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>>>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>>>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>>>>> April 23, 2019 >>>>>>> * >>>>>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>>>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> nexa mailing list >>>>>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>>>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>>>>> -- >>>>>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >>>> -- >>>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> -- EN >> >> ===================================================================== >> Prof. Enrico Nardelli >> Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" >> Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma >> tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 >> mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it >> home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli >> blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ >> http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ >> ===================================================================== >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by J.C. DE MARTIN

faccio però presente che è proprio il superamento (o, se volete, l’arricchimento) della dicotomia proprietà pubblica o priorità privata che è alla base del concetto di “commons”. E Hardin lì proprio non ci arriva. jc (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > On 15 Apr 2019, at 19:33, Enrico Nardelli <nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it> wrote: > > > Scusate se mi intrometto, ma spinto dalla curiosità, prima della mia precedente risposta avevo letto (ammetto, velocemente) l'articolo originale di Hardin, ed avevo notatno che contiene questo passaggio (alla fine del paragrafo "Tragedy of Freedom in a Commons") > > ---- > What shall we do? We have several options. We might sell them off as private property. We might keep them as public property, but allocate the right to enter them. The allocation might be on the basis of wealth, by the use of an auction system. It might be on the basis of merit, as defined by some agreed-upon standards. It might be by lottery. Or it might be on a first-come, first-served basis, administered to long queues. These, I think, are all the reasonable possibilities. They are all objectionable. But we must choose--or acquiesce in the destruction of the commons that we call our National Parks. > ---- > > Non mi sembra che sia una preclusione assoluta ad un possibile regolazione. Anzi, invoca una qualche forma di regolazione dei commons, pena la loro distruzione. In altre parole, mi pare che dica che i commons non possono funzionare (cioè saranno distrutti) se non si decidono delle regole. > > Poi, come ha giustamente osservato l'altro Stefano (Zacchiroli), c'è chi ha usato questa posizione per sostenere che la scelta è la privatizzazione dei beni comuni, ma questa è un'altra storia... > > Ciao, Enrico > > > > Il 15/04/2019 19:17, J.C. DE MARTIN ha scritto: >> ma hai letto l’articolo di Hardin, Stefano? >> I tuoi commenti mi inducono a sospettare di no. >> Hardin infatti in maniera assolutamente apodittica >> scrive che i commons non possono funzionare - punto. >> jc >> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>> >>> non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" >>> >>> su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. >>> anche 2+2=4... >>> >>> ciao, s. >>> >>>> On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>> lui non disse: “senza management”. >>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>>>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>>>> no ? >>>>> >>>>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>>>> April 23, 2019 >>>>>> * >>>>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> nexa mailing list >>>>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >>> >>> -- >>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > -- EN > > ===================================================================== > Prof. Enrico Nardelli > Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" > Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma > tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 > mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it > home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli > blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ > http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ > ===================================================================== > -- > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Enrico Nardelli

Scusate se mi intrometto, ma spinto dalla curiosità, prima della mia precedente risposta avevo letto (ammetto, velocemente) l'articolo originale di Hardin, ed avevo notatno che contiene questo passaggio (alla fine del paragrafo "Tragedy of Freedom in a Commons") ---- What shall we do? We have several options. We might sell them off as private property. We might keep them as public property, but allocate the right to enter them. The allocation might be on the basis of wealth, by the use of an auction system. It might be on the basis of merit, as defined by some agreed-upon standards. It might be by lottery. Or it might be on a first-come, first-served basis, administered to long queues. These, I think, are all the reasonable possibilities. They are all objectionable. But we must choose--or acquiesce in the destruction of the commons that we call our National Parks. ---- Non mi sembra che sia una preclusione assoluta ad un possibile regolazione. Anzi, invoca una qualche forma di regolazione dei commons, pena la loro distruzione. In altre parole, mi pare che dica che i commons non possono funzionare (cioè saranno distrutti) se non si decidono delle regole. Poi, come ha giustamente osservato l'altro Stefano (Zacchiroli), c'è chi ha usato questa posizione per sostenere che la scelta è la privatizzazione dei beni comuni, ma questa è un'altra storia... Ciao, Enrico Il 15/04/2019 19:17, J.C. DE MARTIN ha scritto: > ma hai letto l’articolo di Hardin, Stefano? > I tuoi commenti mi inducono a sospettare di no. > > Hardin infatti in maniera assolutamente apodittica > scrive che i commons non possono funzionare - punto. > > jc > > > > (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > >> On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >> >> non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" >> >> su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. >> anche 2+2=4... >> >> ciao, s. >> >>> On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>> lui non disse: “senza management”. >>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>>> >>>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>>> no ? >>>> >>>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>>> April 23, 2019 >>>>> * >>>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> nexa mailing list >>>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>>> >>>> -- >>>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >> >> -- >> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > -- EN ===================================================================== Prof. Enrico Nardelli Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ ===================================================================== --

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by J.C. DE MARTIN

ma hai letto l’articolo di Hardin, Stefano? I tuoi commenti mi inducono a sospettare di no. Hardin infatti in maniera assolutamente apodittica scrive che i commons non possono funzionare - punto. jc (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: > > non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" > > su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. > anche 2+2=4... > > ciao, s. > >> On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >> lui non disse: “senza management”. >> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>> >>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>> no ? >>> >>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>> April 23, 2019 >>>> * >>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> nexa mailing list >>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>> >>> -- >>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it > > -- > reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Stefano Zacchiroli

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 06:46:40PM +0200, Enrico Nardelli wrote: > Devo comunque confessare che un articolo che contesta un saggio sulla base del fatto che il suo autore sia razzista, eugenista, nativista (questa non l'avevo mai sentita - è uno che crede letteralmente nel Natale?) e islamofobo si squalifica da solo come critica scientifica. Infatti alla fine emerge nell'articolo come il principale interesse del suo autore sia la politica. Concordo. ... e in fatti le critiche di Coriat et al. che citavo più sopra *non* sono basate sulle (orrende) opinioni personali dell'autore del famoso essay in materia di eugenetica. Ma sono più sostanziali sulla definizione stessa. La proposta alternativa (detta male) è di *non* considera come commons qualcosa che sia semplicemente abbandonato a se stesso e quindi, in quanto tale, prono ad essere facilmente appropriato da interessi privati. Poi, certo, possiamo contro argomentare dicendo che è come redefinire l'addizione perché 2+2 faccia 5. Ma culturalmente c'è una differenza enorme. La nozione di commons di "tragedy of the commons" è stata usata culturalmente per promuovere l'appropriazione commerciale come l'unico modo di difendere veramente un commons. La nozione alternative, al contrario, promuove una difesa pubblica, basta su regulation, dei commons. Take your pick. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . zack(a)upsilon.cc . upsilon.cc/zack . . o . . . o . o Computer Science Professor . CTO Software Heritage . . . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . OSI Board Director . . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Enrico Nardelli

A me sembra che l'articolo sia da leggere soprattutto come polemica politica nella chiave della campagna per le prossime presidenziali americane, in cui il clima sarà un argomento principe. Devo comunque confessare che un articolo che contesta un saggio sulla base del fatto che il suo autore sia razzista, eugenista, nativista (questa non l'avevo mai sentita - è uno che crede letteralmente nel Natale?) e islamofobo si squalifica da solo come critica scientifica. Infatti alla fine emerge nell'articolo come il principale interesse del suo autore sia la politica. Per il resto, io tendo a condividere la posizione ricordata da Stefano: i "commons" sono una tragedia perché, nel loro stato naturale, non sono regolati. È secondo me un modo più sofisticato e più argomentato di osservare che se siamo in una giungla il progresso dell'umanità non potrà essere un gran che. Tutti capiamo che si sta parlando di una giungla che, nel suo stato naturale, è senza regole. Ciao, Enrico Il 15/04/2019 18:12, Stefano Quintarelli ha scritto: > non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" > > su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. > anche 2+2=4... > > ciao, s. > > On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >> lui non disse: “senza management”. >> >> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >> >>> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >>> >>> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >>> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >>> no ? >>> >>>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>>> April 23, 2019 >>>> * >>>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> nexa mailing list >>>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>> >>> -- >>> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it >> > -- EN ===================================================================== Prof. Enrico Nardelli Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ ===================================================================== --

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Stefano Quintarelli

non disse nemmeno "senza gendarmi a verificare il rispetto delle quote" su questo principio, ogni affermazione puo' essere confutata cambiando il dominio di riferimento. anche 2+2=4... ciao, s. On 15/04/2019 18:03, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > lui non disse: “senza management”. > > (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > >> On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: >> >> non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... >> nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. >> no ? >> >>> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >>> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >>> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >>> * By Matto Mildenberger >>> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >>> April 23, 2019 >>> * >>> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >>> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> -- >> reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it > -- reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Stefano Zacchiroli

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 06:03:38PM +0200, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > lui non disse: “senza management”. Esatto. Sul tema, consiglio "Vers une république des biens communs ?" di Benjamin Coriat et al. (hat tip a Antonio Casilli, che me l'ha fatto scoprire grazie al suo seminario). -- Stefano Zacchiroli . zack(a)upsilon.cc . upsilon.cc/zack . . o . . . o . o Computer Science Professor . CTO Software Heritage . . . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader & OSI Board Director . . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by J.C. DE MARTIN

lui non disse: “senza management”. (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > On 15 Apr 2019, at 17:42, Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: > > non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... > nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. > no ? > >> On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >> The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ >> The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong >> * By Matto Mildenberger >> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on >> April 23, 2019 >> * >> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… >> (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > -- > reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it

April 15, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by Stefano Quintarelli

non mi pare pero' avesse sbagliato... nel senso che un commons senza management fa quella fine. no ? On 15/04/2019 16:49, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > > The Tragedy of the /Tragedy of the Commons/ > > The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a > racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong > > * By Matto Mildenberger > <https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/matto-mildenberger/> on > April 23, 2019 > > * > > > https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… > > > (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any)) > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > -- reserve your meeting with me at http://cal.quintarelli.it

April 15, 2019

“Ethics” and Ethics

by Giacomo Tesio

https://ia.net/topics/ethics-and-ethics Facebook fishing for our email passwords, Roomba is hovering up all the data on our homes, Amazon is listening to our conversations for laughs, Tik-Tok spying on our kids. And that we see so much dirt on the surface makes it likely that under the surface it’s even worse. The solution for all of this: “Ethics”. Design ethics! Tech ethics! Business ethics! Ethics for AI! [...] The discussion around “ethics” in technology is mostly smoke. The rest is mirrors. There is this expectation of a specialist coming in, the ethicist, the tech ethicist, the AI ethicist, or the design ethicist, that will tell these companies how to be better. The ethicist will solve their ethical dilemmas, logically, with a set of algorithmic rules, and then the corporations will be able to decide which rules their code or “AI” should follow—or not. The idea that ethical specialist can save tech is preposterous. It unveils a complete ignorance of what ethics is, what can and should do. So let’s look at “ethics” and then look at ethics. [...] There is no point discussing “ethics”, if, in the end, all you believe in is cash and power, if everything you are motivated to do is geared towards increasing your user base and your ROI. There is no point other than bullshitting the public. It’s a theatre. [...] It is not an accident that in our time and specifically in the tech industry prefers the word “ethics” over morals so much. [...] Ethics without quotes are the opposite. They’re serious, morally concerned, and they resist technical instrumentalization. Philosophical ethics discusses the morality of human action, it doesn’t provide rules to program self-driving cars. They require to feel and think and understand. As a philosophical discipline, ethics is trying to know what it doesn’t know, it’s aiming at wisdom, not code. [...] We need an informed discussion in parliament, not a clump of aunts and uncles trying to figure out on the fly how the Internet works, or how to make websites, in a time when nobody is talking about “the Internet” or how to make “websites” anymore. We need well-meaning technologists working closely with informed lawmakers, trying to find how to deal with a situation that evolves very quickly. The law needs to protect those who tried to improve the industry from within. Whistleblowers, protestors, those who have the civic courage to disobey. To change the industry from within requires a culture of awareness and resistance inside the companies; we’ve seen clear impact of employee resistance in the last couple of months at Google and Microsoft where employees said no to working on weapon systems, or on search engine for China, or an ethics board with an ethically dubious board. When expensive tech workers take a stand in unity, when systemically relevant employees protest and threaten to shut the machines down, then things move quickly.

April 15, 2019

The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" - Scientific American Blog Network

by J.C. DE MARTIN

The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the Commons The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong By Matto Mildenberger on April 23, 2019 https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-t… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 15, 2019

Sarà l'Europa ad arginare lo strapotere degli algoritmi? | F. Barca

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://www.lavoce.info/archives/58576/strapotere-degli-algoritmi-che-fare/ (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 15, 2019

Why the Moral Machine is a monster

by Giacomo Tesio

https://robots.law.miami.edu/2019/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/MoralMachineMo… The Moral Machine is a good-faith effort to help us think about how autonomous vehicles should be programmed. But unfortunately it's also deeply unhelpful, all the moreso because it received the imprimatur of Nature and then went viral, so that it now drives the discussion about the ethics of AVs. If we want to get the discourse back on track, we may well need not just a way of framing the question that avoids the Moral Machine's methodological errors, but also one that shares the Moral Machine's clickbaity features. Can we make a gamified interface for the structural questions?

April 15, 2019

Safeguards for human studies can’t cope with big data

by antonio.vetro＠polito.it

A 40 anni dal report Belmont, le comunità scientifiche riconoscono l'esigenza di un "report Belmont 2.0" che tenga conto della c.d. rivoluzione digitale https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01164-z == Sent from my wireless device ==

April 15, 2019

Il testo della proposta "Algorithmic Accountability Act"

by Antonio Vetro'

Non credo sia passata in lista -e se sì- me ne scuso. Il testo della Algorithmic Accountability Act proposto qualche giorno fa in Senato USA: "To direct the Federal Trade Commission to require entities that use, store, or share personal information to conduct automated decision system impact assessments and data protection impact assessments. “ […] https://www.scribd.com/document/405802106/Algorithmic-Accountability-Act-of… <https://www.scribd.com/document/405802106/Algorithmic-Accountability-Act-of…> av

April 15, 2019

Microsoft reveals hackers accessed some Outlook.com accounts for months

by Giacomo

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/13/18309192/microsoft-outlook-email-account… Microsoft has started notifying some Outlook.com users that a hacker was able to access accounts for months earlier this year. The software giant discovered that a support agent’s credentials were compromised for its web mail service, allowing unauthorized access to some accounts between January 1st and March 28th, 2019. Microsoft says the hackers could have viewed account email addresses, folder names, and subject lines of emails, but not the content of emails or attachments.

April 15, 2019

Legal Design seminars e Tavola rotonda sui "dark patterns"

by Rossana Ducato

Cari tutti, sperando di fare cosa gradita, segnalo due iniziative che si terranno prossimamente a Bruxelles nell'ambito del corso "European IT Law by Design" della UCLouvain (www.eitlab.eu) Il corso è supportato dal Programma Jean Monnet dell'Unione europea. *26-27 Aprile e 3 Maggio 2019 | Bruxelles* *Legal Design Seminars.* Un ciclo di seminari per discutere le sfide del legal design e l'importanza di questo metodo per uno studente di giurisprudenza. Lecturers e visiting professors: Helena Haapio (Vaasa University), Margaret Hagan (Stanford University), Monica Palmirani (Università di Bologna), Stefania Passera (University of Helsinki), Arianna Rossi (University of Luxembourg). Organizzazione scientifica: Rossana Ducato and Alain Strowel. Programma e locandina disponibile al seguente link: http://eitlab.eu/888-2/ *27 Aprile 2019 | 14.00 | Bruxelles* *Legal Design Roundtable "Dark Patterns in Data Protection: Law, Nudging, Design and the role of Technology".* What are dark patterns? How they can affect the decision-making process of data subjects and consumers? What are the legal remedies available? Can we use legal design to correct such deceiving practices? We are going to discuss these issues in a dynamic symposium with: EDPS, Antonia Fokkema (DG JUST), Margaret Hagan (Stanford), Helena Haapio (Vaasa University/ Lexpert), Stefania Passera (Helsinki University), Arianna Rossi (University of Luxembourg), Anne-Lise Sibony (UCLouvain), Sari Depreeuw (Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles), Dariusz Kloza (VUB), Christopher Schmon (BEUC), Peggy Valcke (KULeuven), Rossana Ducato (UCLouvain and Université Saint-Louis), Alain Strowel (UCLouvain, Université Saint-Louis, KULeuven, Munich IP Centre). Program and registration: http://eitlab.eu/legal-design-roundtable2019/ La partecipazione è gratuita. La registrazione è necessaria per la tavola rotonda. Un saluto cordiale, Rossana Ducato *--* Postdoctoral Researcher Ph.D. in Comparative and European Legal Studies *Institut pour la recherche interdisciplinaire en sciences juridiques* Place Montesquieu, 2 bte L2.07.01, B-1348 Louvain-La-Neuve

April 14, 2019

chiarimento sulle responsabilità legate al software delle macchine auto-guidate

by Enrico Nardelli

Spero che qualche giurista possa essermi d'aiuto. Stavo cercando di capire qual era la situazione relativa alla responsabilità, in Europa, di un produttore di software. Mi è chiaro che la situazione è abbastanza complessa perché spesso il software non è venduto come prodotto ma è un servizio per il quale si paga una licenza, e in questi casi si pone al di fuori della direttiva Europea sulla "Product Liability". Però poi mi sono imbattuto in una discussione che sostiene che qualora il software faccia parte di un prodotto fisico, per esempio una macchina auto-guidata, allora il venditore della macchina è responsabile per i danni provocati anche nel caso la responsabilità sia da attribuire ad un malfunzionamento software. Volevo quindi se possibile una conferma o confutazione (o dei riferimenti a dove ulteriormente approfondire la questione) se quest'ultima interpretazione sia corretta. Grazie in anticipo Enrico -- EN ===================================================================== Prof. Enrico Nardelli Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ ===================================================================== --

April 14, 2019

Alibaba founder defends overtime work culture as 'huge blessing'

by Giacomo

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-tech-labour/alibaba-founder-defend… "I personally think that being able to work 996 is a huge blessing,” he said in remarks posted on the company’s WeChat account. “Many companies and many people don’t have the opportunity to work 996,” Ma said. “If you don’t work 996 when you are young, when can you ever work 996?” [...] “In this world, everyone wants success, wants a nice life, wants to be respected,” Ma said. “Let me ask everyone, if you don’t put out more time and energy than others, how can you achieve the success you want?” [...] This month activists on Microsoft’s GitHub, the online code repository site, launched a project titled “996.ICU” where tech workers listed Alibaba among the companies ranked as having some of the worst working conditions.

April 14, 2019