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

UK businesses using artificial intelligence to monitor staff activity | Productivity | The Guardian

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/07/uk-businesses-using-arti… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 7, 2019

How Amazon's $97 million Eero acquisition screwed employees and minted millionaires

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://mashable.com/article/amazon-eero-wifi-router-sale/ (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 6, 2019

Re: [nexa] Google employees are lining up to trash Google’s AI ethics council

by Marco Ciurcina

In data sabato 6 aprile 2019 10:50:42 CEST, Arturo Di Corinto ha scritto: > L'hanno chiusa infatti dopo la petizione di 2500 impiegati... che democratici.. :-) Se questa decisione danneggia economicamente Google, gli amministratori sono responsabili dei danni che ne conseguono (qualunque azionista gli può fare causa). IMHO, tutto sommato, gli conveniva chiuderlo. m.c. > > https://medium.com/@against.transphobia/googlers-against-transphobia-and-hat > e-b1b0a5dbf76?_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9f0s4jt3GGe9hVM1WCPmWgvzVTaki0WlxRcZi2zjByxAtX8 > inEHieU4_ED90p8HOzCb5RvwkOmHFrPAxlH4UZvHODjg53hOeauFai4JHHewRJH3NE&_hsmi=714 > 95159 > > *Google’s AI ethics board has been cancelled. *After giving it a whirlwind > of a 10-day existence, Google confirmed to Vox > <https://go.technologyreview.com/e2t/c/*W1_zfbr7lL2ydW2Zv3cb4Szxb20/*W4S8rPT > 3FlwPpW2QdMXF8PfXZV0/5/f18dQhb0S4JY73F0FpW12gZhV5VRjr7W1GYdXd2by7dbW21KLNb6K > rBJKW60jkCl1dP2k4W3fWLDy85dBJfW3MJFFh2RRkMYW7clc4t95G_27N8cyXvVyTyjnW5VXtTk1 > 9HvlGN5p3b6GhGw0QW8hsdwJ7JH8VfW554ygB5yMb7kW7T3plZ7DJ-CJW60hk-K81tZWTW1N6jLW > 3GB8t_Vtb_3-5nCsT_Vn2m372FllDBW2D0bH26Kq71MW22w6JG2qLzxCW3wXz0N19GX3SN4RFxx5 > XZy9gW476Zkv3TKFcxV6wnLr37SqWtW8lqK9T2yQ7gnW8WsbzF3BxKPcW37T4YM5v8JZzW5JfYdS > 5VLNnlW1QyqgK4c0LmQN3Ng24b5HzHJN22mVwVCZ4gVW6sc5Z52GjwM-W3bptPy4jgZY8VbV1PD6 > 2rnhCW672Ks27nN89RW9hFVxW94Fby5W8JtxvM5N-XnrW1hLjlD5npSm5W7pt2Cn4gw6pDN6Kfqv > fsNXb8W7Q8_b95wJ1jFVxs6Q71Qw46mW1MyzNW528mZ7W7hDtqN5738QjVf2C498q1KV4VN8XhD4 > vnQsZW8cyJHc92M_jhW93TQ9m88KhfyW5DtqjN4XtQSYW4VBbqf3nk73DW7mgMPw6WnxrhW8CPjB > J8s1tF-W3rPcks9b_CWZW8NdcM26q0Bf3N95bGskVtBB4W2r2BGJ3hjqyDf7MjfbW04> > yesterday that it was pulling the plug on its controversial ethics board > and rebuilding it from scratch. > > > > Il giorno mer 3 apr 2019 alle ore 10:27 Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> ha > > scritto: > > On 03/04/2019, Arturo Di Corinto <arturo.dicorinto(a)uniroma1.it> wrote: > > > Google employees are lining up to trash Google’s AI ethics council > > > The independent council was meant to help Google’s public image, but the > > > blowback shows just how fraught—and politicized—use of AI is becoming. > > > > Molto interessante, grazie della condivisione! ;-) > > > > > > La Tecnologia è sempre una forza Politica dirompente, e la lettera > > mostra bene la consapevolezza del potere che il controllo del software > > rappresenta e la legittima preoccupazione rispetto a chi venga > > eletto^W nominato^W incaricato di tener buoni^W^W tutelare i > > cittadini. > > > > > > D'altro canto è un peccato che la dichiarazione del Professor Acquisti > > venga oscurata dalle (pur legittime) preoccupazioni sui curricula > > > > degli impiegati di Google ATEAC: > > > I'd like to share that I've declined the invitation to the > > > ATEAC council. While I'm devoted to research grappling > > > with key ethical issues of fairness, rights & inclusion in AI, > > > I don't believe this is the right forum for me to engage > > > in this important work. > > > > https://twitter.com/ssnstudy/status/1112099054551515138 > > > > > > Credo di poter condividere e persino confermare sperimentalmente > > l'analisi di del Professor Acquisti. > > > > Google non è il luogo adatto in cui parlare di Etica Informatica. > > Né di Informatica Etica. > > > > > > Giacomo

April 6, 2019

Re: [nexa] Google employees are lining up to trash Google’s AI ethics council

by Giacomo

On April 6, 2019 8:50:42 AM UTC, Arturo Di Corinto <arturo.dicorinto(a)uniroma1.it> wrote: >Il giorno mer 3 apr 2019 alle ore 10:27 Giacomo Tesio ha scritto: >> D'altro canto è un peccato che la dichiarazione del Professor Acquisti >> venga oscurata dalle (pur legittime) preoccupazioni sui curricula >> degli impiegati di Google ATEAC: > >L'hanno chiusa infatti dopo la petizione di 2500 impiegati... Dici che possiamo appiattire la questione ad una sorta di vittoria politica di un sindacato in via di definizione? Sicuramente c'è questa componente. Sicuramente emerge la serietà della questione Politica nascosta dietro la retorica dell'Etica di cui i dipendenti di Google si sono mostrati molto più consapevoli degli osservatori esterni. Ma non sembra anche a te che questa protesta rimanga, nei modi e negli obbiettivi, estremamente statunitense? >*Google’s AI ethics board has been cancelled. *After giving it a whirlwind >of a 10-day existence, Google confirmed to Vox >yesterday that it was pulling the plug on its controversial ethics >board and rebuilding it from scratch. Dunque torneranno all'attacco. Probabilmente con "consulenti esterni" più accorti e... diplomatici. Magari all'interno di un consorzio di imprese analogo alla Linux Foundation. Giacomo

April 6, 2019

Hey Google, sorry you lost your ethics council, so we made one for you

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613281/google-cancels-ateac-ai-ethics-co… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 6, 2019

Re: [nexa] Google employees are lining up to trash Google’s AI ethics council

by Arturo Di Corinto

L'hanno chiusa infatti dopo la petizione di 2500 impiegati... https://medium.com/@against.transphobia/googlers-against-transphobia-and-ha… *Google’s AI ethics board has been cancelled. *After giving it a whirlwind of a 10-day existence, Google confirmed to Vox <https://go.technologyreview.com/e2t/c/*W1_zfbr7lL2ydW2Zv3cb4Szxb20/*W4S8rPT…> yesterday that it was pulling the plug on its controversial ethics board and rebuilding it from scratch. Il giorno mer 3 apr 2019 alle ore 10:27 Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> ha scritto: > On 03/04/2019, Arturo Di Corinto <arturo.dicorinto(a)uniroma1.it> wrote: > > Google employees are lining up to trash Google’s AI ethics council > > The independent council was meant to help Google’s public image, but the > > blowback shows just how fraught—and politicized—use of AI is becoming. > > Molto interessante, grazie della condivisione! ;-) > > > La Tecnologia è sempre una forza Politica dirompente, e la lettera > mostra bene la consapevolezza del potere che il controllo del software > rappresenta e la legittima preoccupazione rispetto a chi venga > eletto^W nominato^W incaricato di tener buoni^W^W tutelare i > cittadini. > > > D'altro canto è un peccato che la dichiarazione del Professor Acquisti > venga oscurata dalle (pur legittime) preoccupazioni sui curricula > degli impiegati di Google ATEAC: > > > I'd like to share that I've declined the invitation to the > > ATEAC council. While I'm devoted to research grappling > > with key ethical issues of fairness, rights & inclusion in AI, > > I don't believe this is the right forum for me to engage > > in this important work. > > https://twitter.com/ssnstudy/status/1112099054551515138 > > > Credo di poter condividere e persino confermare sperimentalmente > l'analisi di del Professor Acquisti. > > Google non è il luogo adatto in cui parlare di Etica Informatica. > Né di Informatica Etica. > > > Giacomo > -- Arturo Di Corinto www.dicorinto.it ---------------------------------> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003 Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003

April 6, 2019

From AI to ML to AI: On Swirling Nomenclature & Slurried Thought – Approximately Correct

by J.C. DE MARTIN

http://approximatelycorrect.com/2018/06/05/ai-ml-ai-swirling-nomenclature-s… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 6, 2019

Why Wolfram Tech Isn’t Open Source—A Dozen Reason

by Giacomo Tesio

https://blog.wolfram.com/2019/04/02/why-wolfram-tech-isnt-open-source-a-doz… At the risk of provoking the fundamentalist end of the open-source community, I thought I would share some of my views in this blog. [...] Much of this blog could be summed up with two answers: (1) free, open-source software can be very good, but it isn’t good at doing what we are trying to do; with a large fraction of the reason being (2) open source distributes design over small, self-assembling groups who individually tackle parts of an overall task, but large-scale, unified design needs centralized control and sustained effort. I came up with 12 reasons why I think that it would not have been possible to create the Wolfram technology stack using a free and open-source model. I would be interested to hear your views in the comments section below the blog. - A coherent vision requires centralized design - High-level languages need more design than low-level languages - You need multidisciplinary teams to unify disparate fields - Hard cases and boring stuff need to get done too - Crowd-sourced decisions can be bad for you - Our developers work for you, not just themselves - Unified computation requires unified design - Unified representation requires unified design - Open source doesn’t bring major tech innovation to market - Paid software offers an open quid pro quo - It takes steady income to sustain long-term R&D - Bad design is expensive [...] FOSS development tends to react to immediate user needs—specific functionality, existing workflows or emulation of existing closed-source software. Major innovations require anticipating needs that users do not know they have and addressing them with solutions that are not constrained by an individual’s experience. [...] Open source often does create ecosystems that encourage many small-scale innovations, but while bolder innovations do widely exist at the early experimental stages, they often fail to be refined to the point of usefulness in large-scale adoption.

April 5, 2019

Re: [nexa] When a black box is valuable

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Premesso che interpellare una persona non iscritta a una lista mettendo in copia la lista stessa non è prassi consigliabile anche solo perché l'eventuale risposta della persona non passerebbe in lista (essendo la persona non iscritta alla lista), per favore portate l'eventuale prosieguo dello scambio 'offlist'. Grazie molte, buona serata, juan carlos On 05/04/2019 20:52, Giacomo wrote: > On April 5, 2019 5:47:06 PM UTC, Simone Basso <bassosimone(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Giacomo Tesio wrote: >>> Hackers are weird people... ;-) >> This is not a response. I have met plenty of non weird hackers and >> plenty of weird hackers. >> >> As much as you can choose to identify yourself with this community, your >> behaviour is ultimately yours, and alleged stereotypical community >> traits should not justify it. > I think you misreas my words: it was not meant as a justification as I don't see much to justify. > > It's an explanation of my behaviour. > Such behaviour sometimes looks weird to people who don't share my culture. > For example what you describe as aggressive is my way to friendly debate with a peer and i would feel as disrespectful if anything less challenging was addressed at me for something I wrote or coded. > > > Unfortunately I'm unable to predict if something I do will look weird until someone tell me it's weird to them. > > That's why my apology stands: because I realized I hurted you and it was not my intention. > I'm really sorry for this. > > > > >> What strikes me as counterproductive here is that you did not consider >> less direct and more friendly ways of approaching them. > If you read the mail we are talking about you will see that it's not a set of questions: the article was clear and as I wrote to the author even insightful at some points. > > But the tone of my criticism was driven by the indignation I feel when I read this kind of arguments. > > Not because they are wrong, but because they mislead people who don't have the skills to see how broken they are! > > To my eyes, this behaviour is simply an unethical abuse of our knowledge. > >> Heck, they may even answer you and that’s for sure gonna be fun. > That's what I hope! :-) > > There's nothing more funny to me than being proved wrong: that's how I learn things! > >> You May want to read Raymond’s essay on how to ask questions in the >> smart way. As much as Raymond is questionable, I think that essay is still >> interesting read and has actually helped me in this respect. > Indeed, ESR opinions are VERY questionable. > But I guess somebody might say the same about me as a whole (indipendently of my opinions). > > Yet as I said I was not asking questions, but challenging answers. > > >>> OTOH, I would find a bit wimp to do the opposite: why would I have >>> published my mail with the article in the first place if I don't want >>> to discuss the matter anymore? >> I am not sure that the choice of publishing the email is personal in that venue. > Yes, probably it's mandatory. > > But WHY it is mandatory? > Because debating your contributions is a fundamental part of the scientific method. > > >> They will behave as they see fit. This is not my concern. I was annoyed >> by the way in which you behave and I saw useful to chime in. Some sort of >> “someone is wrong on the Internet” reaction, modulo the fact that I >> doubt I will ever be 100% right on any topic. > Well, given that I've learnt something new about this community, I thank you for sharing your opinion. I will make treasure of this lesson for the future. > > > Now... do you have something to object to the _contents_ of my criticism too? > > > > Giacomo > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

April 5, 2019

Comment Facebook compte empêcher toute ingérence et manipulation pendant les européennes

by Alberto Cammozzo

<https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2019/04/05/ingerence-etrangere-le-pla…> Ancien procureur spécialisé dans la cybercriminalité, un temps conseiller de Barack Obama à la Maison Blanche, Nathaniel Gleicher dirige désormais, chez Facebook, les équipes chargées de contrer les piratages informatiques et les opérations de propagande. Basé en Californie, il a passé trois semaines en Europe depuis le début de l’année à enchaîner les préparatifs pour l’élection européenne. Depuis 2016 et l’élection présidentielle américaine, la perspective de voir le scrutin manipulé par une puissance étrangère via les réseaux sociaux hante les responsables politiques. Nous avons rencontré Nathaniel Gleicher dans les locaux français de Facebook, jeudi 4 avril. Facebook est attendu au tournant pour les élections européennes. Quelle est votre stratégie ? Les élections européennes font partie de nos principales priorités. C’est un énorme défi : chaque pays européen organise une forme d’élection locale. Nous avons une équipe qui se consacre aux élections européennes depuis un petit moment. Nous avons réalisé une évaluation des menaces et des risques qui pèsent sur l’élection, il y a un mois et demi. Nous avons récemment organisé un exercice à Bruxelles : nous avons réuni des gens venus de toute l’entreprise pour simuler l’élection et anticiper les menaces qui pourraient émerger.

April 5, 2019