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

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