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

Why the huge growth in AI spells a big opportunity for transdisciplinary researchers
by Antonio Vetro' April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01251-1 "[…] current events around digital technology, along with debates about biased algorithms and ethical and regulatory challenges of autonomous systems, underscore the fact that AI is more than a technology of the future. It is impacting today’s sociopolitical climate. More importantly, current events and debates highlight the fact that AI management is more of a social and political issue than an engineering challenge. " Tendenzialmente mi trovo d’accordo con l’autore, pur senza sminuire le sfide tecnologiche. antonio v.

1 0

«Google e Amazon? Vi spiego come l’Antitrust Ue regola i big di internet» - Corriere.it
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.corriere.it/economia/aziende/19_aprile_19/google-amazoncosi-tut… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

9 18

Apple CEO says Europe is leading U.S. with tech regulation
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/23/apple-ceo-says-europe-is-leading-us-with-te… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

2 1

New Frontiers of Philanthro‐capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism - Burns - - Antipode - Wiley Online Library
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/anti.12534 (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Is cyberwarfare war? Insurers balk at paying for some cyberattacks
by Alberto Cammozzo April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

Interessante e ampia estensione al cyberwarfare della clausola di esclusione per conflitto armato nei contratti assicurativi. Immagino che possa ulteriormente complicare lo scenario IoT e dei sistemi di guida autonoma: l'assicurazione si defila se l'auto/aereo/drone a guida autonoma o il tostapane/lavatrice/friggitrice IoT causa vittime o danni per effetto di un attacco informatico riconosciuto come "bellico"... A questo punto chi paga? Il produttore dell'oggetto, il proprietario dello stesso (ammesso che non sia parte dannegiata) o nessuno? <https://thebulletin.org/2019/04/is-cyberwarfare-war-insurers-balk-at-paying…> [...] And US businesses may no longer be able to rely on insurance to cover their losses. In an era of unceasing cyberattacks, including cases of state-sponsored hacking, insurance companies are beginning to re-interpret an old line in their contracts known as the “war exclusion.” Stripping away the metaphorical connotation of the term “cyberwarfare,” big insurers like Zurich Insurance have decided that state-sponsored attacks are basically just plain warfare. This shift comes as the US government is increasingly attributing state-sponsored cyberattacks to their alleged perpetrators, a development that some argue is a means of holding bad actors accountable. But the policy certainly doesn’t seem to be doing any favors to the private sector. The New York Times fleshed out the insurance companies’ new legal strategy in a recent article about the woes of Modelez International, the maker of Oreo cookies and other mainstays of the snack food industry. Based in the Chicago suburbs, Mondelez was among the hundreds of companies hit in the so-called “NotPetya” attack of 2017. The Times reported that Mondelez expected its more than $100 million in losses to be covered by its Zurich insurance policy. But Zurich swatted back Mondelez’s claim, citing an exclusion for “hostile or warlike action in time of peace or war … by any government or sovereign power,” according to the complaint Mondelez filed in court last fall, which Crain’s Chicago Business obtained. In February 2018, the White House attributed the NotPetya attack to the Russian military, calling it the “most destructive and costly cyberattack in history.” By blaming the Russians, the government gave Zurich an opening, but not necessarily an airtight argument: “Zurich’s invocation of a ‘hostile or warlike action’ exclusion to deny coverage for malicious ‘cyber’ incidents was … unprecedented,” Mondelez’s complaint asserted. “The purported application of this type of exclusion to anything other than conventional armed conflict or hostilities was unprecedented.” “We still don’t have a clear idea of what cyberwar actually looks like,” cyber risk adviser Jake Olcott told the Times. “That is one of the struggles in this case. No one has said this was an all-out cyberwar by Russia.” [...]

2 1

Deep Learning And The Limits Of Learning By Correlation Rather Than Causation
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2019/04/18/deep-learning-and-the-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

2 1

Apple Face-Recognition Blamed by New York Teen for False Arrest - Bloomberg
by Alberto Cammozzo April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

Se casi come questi si moltiplicheranno, implementare riconoscimento facciale inaffidabile può cominciare a costare parecchio più di quanto rende. <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-22/apple-face-recognition-b…> A New York student sued Apple Inc. for $1 billion, claiming the company’s facial-recognition software falsely linked him to a series of thefts from Apple stores. Ousmane Bah, 18, said he was arrested at his home in New York in November and charged with stealing from an Apple store. The arrest warrant included a photo that didn’t resemble Bah, he said in a lawsuit filed Monday. One of the thefts he was charged with, in Boston, took place on the day in June he was attending his senior prom in Manhattan, he said. Bah said he had previously lost a non-photo learner’s permit, which may have been found or stolen by the real thief and used as identification in Apple stores. As a result, Bah claimed, his name may have been mistakenly connected to the thief’s face in Apple’s facial-recognition system, which he said the company uses in its stores to track people suspected of theft. "He was forced to respond to multiple false allegations which led to severe stress and hardship,” Bah said in the complaint. Apple and Security Industry Specialists Inc., a security firm that’s also named as a defendant, declined to comment on the suit. The case is Bah v. Apple Inc., 19-cv-03539, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

1 0

You're thinking about smart cities in completely the wrong way | WIRED UK
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

You're thinking about smart cities in completely the wrong way Technology gives us an opportunity to make cities more open, inclusive and democratic. But only if it's used in the right way, says Barcelona's chief technology officer, Francesca Bria By FRANCESCA BRIA 17 Apr 2019 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/reboot-britain-francesca-bria (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

How the Boeing 737 Max Disaster Looks to a Software Developer
by Alberto Cammozzo April 22, 2019

April 22, 2019

Come accade che 346 persone muoiano di software. <https://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/how-the-boeing-737-max-disaste…> [...] It is astounding that no one who wrote the MCAS software for the 737 Max seems even to have raised the possibility of using multiple inputs, including the opposite angle-of-attack sensor, in the computer’s determination of an impending stall. As a lifetime member of the software development fraternity, I don’t know what toxic combination of inexperience, hubris, or lack of cultural understanding led to this mistake. But I do know that it’s indicative of a much deeper problem. The people who wrote the code for the original MCAS system were obviously terribly far out of their league and did not know it. How can they can implement a software fix, much less give us any comfort that the rest of the flight management software is reliable? So Boeing produced a dynamically unstable airframe, the 737 Max. That is big strike No. 1. Boeing then tried to mask the 737’s dynamic instability with a software system. Big strike No. 2. Finally, the software relied on systems known for their propensity to fail (angle-of-attack indicators) and did not appear to include even rudimentary provisions to cross-check the outputs of the angle-of-attack sensor against other sensors, or even the other angle-of-attack sensor. Big strike No. 3. None of the above should have passed muster. None of the above should have passed the “OK” pencil of the most junior engineering staff, much less a DER. That’s not a big strike. That’s a political, social, economic, and technical sin. [...] It is likely that MCAS, originally added in the spirit of increasing safety, has now killed more people than it could have ever saved. It doesn’t need to be “fixed” with more complexity, more software. It needs to be removed altogether.

7 12

The global race for 5G supremacy is not yet won
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 22, 2019

April 22, 2019

https://www.ft.com/content/339c74d8-61ff-11e9-b285-3acd5d43599e (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0