June 2021 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

The future of Android App Bundles is here

by Giacomo Tesio

Since we launched the Android App Bundle in May 2018, we’ve seen our developer community embrace this new standard to benefit from streamlined releases and advanced distribution features. There are now over 1 million apps using app bundles in production, including the majority of the top 1,000 apps and games on Google Play such as Adobe, Duolingo, Gameloft, Netflix, redBus, Riafy, and Twitter. To bring these benefits to more users and focus on modern Android distribution that benefits all developers, Google Play will start requiring new apps to be published with the Android App Bundle starting August 2021. [...] If you haven’t made the switch to app bundles yet, here are some of the benefits you’re missing: [...] - Play App Signing: Play App Signing, which is required for app bundles, protects your app signing key from loss by using Google’s secure infrastructure and offers the option of upgrading to a new, cryptographically stronger app signing key. ___ Marketing tratto da https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2021/06/the-future-of-android-app… https://web.archive.org/web/20210630211418/https://android-developers.googl… Per chi non lo sapesse, Play App Signing è questa roba qui: ``` When you use Play App Signing, your keys are stored on the same infrastructure that Google uses to store its own keys. Keys are protected by Google’s Key Management Service. ``` https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9842756?hl=en https://web.archive.org/web/20210630211524/https://support.google.com/googl… Così Google terrà al sicuro le chiavi private di chi pubblica applicazioni (ed i loro aggiornamenti) su Google Play. Potrà così decidere autonomamente di aggiornare una applicazione. E visto che Google Play autentica gli utenti, potrà farlo in maniera "personalizzata". Per la sicurezza dell'utente, si intende. Cosa mai potrebbe andare storto? Giacomo

June 30, 2021

Re: [nexa] Conspiracy: in Theory and Practice — Edward Snowden

by Antonio Iacono

Secondo la Treccani, la cospirazione è "Unione segreta di più persone che s’accordano per conseguire uno scopo comune, per lo più di natura sovversiva, contro lo stato, le sue istituzioni, o in genere contro chi detiene il potere". In teoria queste persone possono anche essere dei "normali" cittadini. Nella pratica è molto difficile mettere insieme molte persone e assicurarne il segreto, quindi questo gruppo deve essere necessariamente formato da pochi elementi, ma molto potenti. Nella storia ci sono stati congiure, complotti, cospirazioni, alcune andate "a buon fine", il Cesaricidio, altre (molte) fallite, dalla congiura dell’harem contro Ramses III, nel 1155 a.C. [1] alla congiura dei paggi contro Alessandro Magno, nel 328 a.C [2] per citarne due delle più datate. Veniamo agli ultimi cento anni, a quel capolavoro di perfidia di Stato che fu l'incendio del Reichstag [3]. Il Partito Nazionalsocialista veniva dalla sconfitta elettorale del novembre del 1932 (i metodi violenti e poco ortodossi avevano generato reticenze anche presso la borghesia tedesca), ma con l'incendio del palazzo del parlamento, Hitler accusò i comunisti e ne trasse enormi vantaggi politici tanto da stravincere le successive elezioni [4]. Il resto, purtroppo, è ben noto. La cospirazione, in questo caso, non era "contro chi detiene il potere" (Hitler era già Cancelliere), ma per avere "pieni poteri". Poi c'è la cospirazione "preventiva", quella per "evitare" di perdere il potere. La strategia della tensione [5] ne è un tragico esempio. Mi fermo qua non essendo questo il luogo adatto per discuterne, invito solo chi ne ha voglia ad approfondire. Nella storia, recente o passata, c'è quasi sempre la risposta ai nostri interrogativi. In fondo, l'essere umano, da Ramses in poi, non è mica cambiato di molto ;) Antonio [1] https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congiura_dell%27harem [2] http://www.tuttostoria.net/storia-antica.aspx?code=1030 [3] https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incendio_del_Reichstag [4] https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elezioni_federali_tedesche_del_1933 [5] https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategia_della_tensione_in_Italia On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 12:52 PM Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> wrote: > > The greatest conspiracies are open and notorious — not theories, but > practices expressed through law and policy, technology, and finance. > Counterintuitively, these conspiracies are more often than not > announced in public and with a modicum of pride. They’re dutifully > reported in our newspapers; they’re bannered onto the covers of our > magazines; updates on their progress are scrolled across our screens — > all with such regularity as to render us unable to relate the banality > of their methods to the rapacity of their ambitions. > > The party in power wants to redraw district lines. The prime interest > rate has changed. A free service has been created to host our personal > files. These conspiracies order, and disorder, our lives; and yet they > can’t compete for attention with digital graffiti about pedophile > Satanists in the basement of a DC pizzeria. > > This, in sum, is our problem: the truest conspiracies meet with the > least opposition. > > [...] > > It took years — eight years and counting in exile — for me to realize > that I was missing the point: we talk about conspiracy theories in > order to avoid talking about conspiracy practices, which are often too > daunting, too threatening, too total. > > [...] > > In democracies today, what is important to an increasing many is not > what rights and freedoms are recognized, but what beliefs are > respected: what history, or story, undergirds their identities as > citizens, and as members of religious, racial, and ethnic communities. > It’s this replacement-function of false conspiracies — the way they > replace unified or majoritarian histories with parochial and partisan > stories — that prepares the stage for political upheaval. > > Especially pernicious is the way that false conspiracies absolve their > followers of engaging with the truth. Citizenship in a > conspiracy-society doesn’t require evaluating a statement of proposed > fact for its truth-value, and then accepting it or rejecting it > accordingly, so much as it requires the complete and total rejection of > all truth-value that comes from an enemy source, and the substitution > of an alternative plot, narrated from elsewhere. > > [...] Jesse Walker, an editor at Reason and author of The United States > of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (2013), offers the following > categories of enemy-based conspiracy thinking: > > - "Enemy Outside," [...] > - "Enemy Within," [...] > - "Enemy Above," [...] > - "Enemy Below," [...] > - "Benevolent Conspiracies," [...] > > Other forms of conspiracy-taxonomy are just a Wikipedia link away [...] > > I find things to admire in all of these taxonomies, but it strikes me > as notable that none makes provision for truth-value. Further, I'm not > sure that these or any mode of classification can adequately address > the often-alternating, dependent nature of conspiracies, whereby a true > conspiracy (e.g. the 9/11 hijackers) triggers a false conspiracy (e.g. > 9/11 was an inside job), and a false conspiracy (e.g. Iraq has weapons > of mass destruction) triggers a true conspiracy (e.g. the invasion of > Iraq). > > Another critique I would offer of the extant taxonomies involves a > reassessment of causality, which is more properly the province of > psychology and philosophy. Most of the taxonomies of > conspiracy-thinking are based on the logic that most intelligence > agencies use when they spread disinformation, treating falsity and > fiction as levers of influence and confusion that can plunge a populace > into powerlessness, making them vulnerable to new beliefs — and even > new governments. > > But this top-down approach fails to take into account that the > predominant conspiracy theories in America today are developed from the > bottom-up, plots concocted not behind the closed doors of intelligence > agencies but on the open Internet by private citizens, by > people. In sum, conspiracy theories do not inculcate > powerlessness, so much as they are the signs and symptoms of > powerlessness itself. > > This leads us to those other taxonomies, which classify conspiracies > not by their content, or intent, but by the desires that cause one to > subscribe to them. Note, in particular, the > epistemic/existential/social triad of system-justification: Belief in a > conspiracy is considered “epistemic” if the desire underlying the > belief is to get at “the truth,” for its own sake; belief in a > conspiracy is considered “existential” if the desire underlying the > belief is to feel safe and secure, under another's control; while > belief in a conspiracy is considered “social” if the desire underlying > the belief is to develop a positive self-image, or a sense of belonging > to a community. > > From Outside, from Within, from Above, from Below, from > Beyond...events, systems, superconspiracies...shallow and deep > heuristics...these are all attempts to chart a new type of politics > that is also a new type of identity, a confluence of politics and > identity that imbues all aspects of contemporary life. Ultimately, the > only truly honest taxonomical approach to conspiracy-thinking that I > can come up with is something of an inversion: the idea that > conspiracies themselves are a taxonomy, a method by which democracies > especially sort themselves into parties and tribes, a typology through > which people who lack definite or satisfactory narratives as citizens > explain to themselves their immiseration, their disenfranchisement, > their lack of power, and even their lack of will. > > > Tratto da https://edwardsnowden.substack.com/p/conspiracy-pt1 > (da visitare con le dovute precauzioni... ;-) > > > Giacomo > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 30, 2021

Guida alla presentazione della domanda di autorizzazione alla Sperimentazione Clinica che preveda l’utilizzo di sistemi di Intelligenza Artificiale (AI) o di Machine Learning (ML)

by don Luca Peyron

Mi pare non sia passato in lista, Buona lettura dl https://www.aifa.gov.it/-/guida-alla-presentazione-della-domanda-di-autoriz… _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

June 30, 2021

La cybersecurity

by don Luca Peyron

Non è solo questione informatica... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57624942 dl _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

June 30, 2021

Conspiracy: in Theory and Practice — Edward Snowden

by Giacomo Tesio

The greatest conspiracies are open and notorious — not theories, but practices expressed through law and policy, technology, and finance. Counterintuitively, these conspiracies are more often than not announced in public and with a modicum of pride. They’re dutifully reported in our newspapers; they’re bannered onto the covers of our magazines; updates on their progress are scrolled across our screens — all with such regularity as to render us unable to relate the banality of their methods to the rapacity of their ambitions. The party in power wants to redraw district lines. The prime interest rate has changed. A free service has been created to host our personal files. These conspiracies order, and disorder, our lives; and yet they can’t compete for attention with digital graffiti about pedophile Satanists in the basement of a DC pizzeria. This, in sum, is our problem: the truest conspiracies meet with the least opposition. [...] It took years — eight years and counting in exile — for me to realize that I was missing the point: we talk about conspiracy theories in order to avoid talking about conspiracy practices, which are often too daunting, too threatening, too total. [...] In democracies today, what is important to an increasing many is not what rights and freedoms are recognized, but what beliefs are respected: what history, or story, undergirds their identities as citizens, and as members of religious, racial, and ethnic communities. It’s this replacement-function of false conspiracies — the way they replace unified or majoritarian histories with parochial and partisan stories — that prepares the stage for political upheaval. Especially pernicious is the way that false conspiracies absolve their followers of engaging with the truth. Citizenship in a conspiracy-society doesn’t require evaluating a statement of proposed fact for its truth-value, and then accepting it or rejecting it accordingly, so much as it requires the complete and total rejection of all truth-value that comes from an enemy source, and the substitution of an alternative plot, narrated from elsewhere. [...] Jesse Walker, an editor at Reason and author of The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (2013), offers the following categories of enemy-based conspiracy thinking: - "Enemy Outside," [...] - "Enemy Within," [...] - "Enemy Above," [...] - "Enemy Below," [...] - "Benevolent Conspiracies," [...] Other forms of conspiracy-taxonomy are just a Wikipedia link away [...] I find things to admire in all of these taxonomies, but it strikes me as notable that none makes provision for truth-value. Further, I'm not sure that these or any mode of classification can adequately address the often-alternating, dependent nature of conspiracies, whereby a true conspiracy (e.g. the 9/11 hijackers) triggers a false conspiracy (e.g. 9/11 was an inside job), and a false conspiracy (e.g. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction) triggers a true conspiracy (e.g. the invasion of Iraq). Another critique I would offer of the extant taxonomies involves a reassessment of causality, which is more properly the province of psychology and philosophy. Most of the taxonomies of conspiracy-thinking are based on the logic that most intelligence agencies use when they spread disinformation, treating falsity and fiction as levers of influence and confusion that can plunge a populace into powerlessness, making them vulnerable to new beliefs — and even new governments. But this top-down approach fails to take into account that the predominant conspiracy theories in America today are developed from the bottom-up, plots concocted not behind the closed doors of intelligence agencies but on the open Internet by private citizens, by people. In sum, conspiracy theories do not inculcate powerlessness, so much as they are the signs and symptoms of powerlessness itself. This leads us to those other taxonomies, which classify conspiracies not by their content, or intent, but by the desires that cause one to subscribe to them. Note, in particular, the epistemic/existential/social triad of system-justification: Belief in a conspiracy is considered “epistemic” if the desire underlying the belief is to get at “the truth,” for its own sake; belief in a conspiracy is considered “existential” if the desire underlying the belief is to feel safe and secure, under another's control; while belief in a conspiracy is considered “social” if the desire underlying the belief is to develop a positive self-image, or a sense of belonging to a community. From Outside, from Within, from Above, from Below, from Beyond...events, systems, superconspiracies...shallow and deep heuristics...these are all attempts to chart a new type of politics that is also a new type of identity, a confluence of politics and identity that imbues all aspects of contemporary life. Ultimately, the only truly honest taxonomical approach to conspiracy-thinking that I can come up with is something of an inversion: the idea that conspiracies themselves are a taxonomy, a method by which democracies especially sort themselves into parties and tribes, a typology through which people who lack definite or satisfactory narratives as citizens explain to themselves their immiseration, their disenfranchisement, their lack of power, and even their lack of will. Tratto da https://edwardsnowden.substack.com/p/conspiracy-pt1 (da visitare con le dovute precauzioni... ;-) Giacomo

June 30, 2021

EDPB & EDPS call for ban on use of AI for automated recognition of human features in publicly accessible spaces, and some other uses of AI that can lead to unfair discrimination [notsp]

by Diego.Latella

In a joint opinion regarding the European Commission's Proposal for Regulation on artificial intelligence, "[t]aking into account the extremely high risks posed by remote biometric identification of individuals in publicly accessible spaces, the EDPB [European Data Protection Board] and the EDPS [European Data Protection Supervisor] call for a general ban on any use of AI for automated recognition of human features in publicly accessible spaces, such as recognition of faces, gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioural signals, in any context." https://edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2021/edpb-edps-call-ban-use-ai-automated-r… DL -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://www.isti.cnr.it/People/D.Latella - ph: +390506212982, mob: +39 348 8283101, fax: +390506212040 =================== The quest for a war-free world has a basic purpose: survival. But if in the process we learn how to achieve it by love rather than by fear, by kindness rather than compulsion; if in the process we learn how to combine the essential with the enjoyable, the expedient with the benevolent, the practical with the beautiful, this will be an extra incentive to embark on this great task. Above all, remember your humanity. -- Sir Joseph Rotblat I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

June 29, 2021

Two GAO reports on Defense Cybersecurity and Software Develpment. Just published

by Diego.Latella

Two GAO reports on Defense Cybersecurity and Software Develpment. Just published Defense Cybersecurity: Defense Logistics Agency Needs to Address Risk Management Deficiencies in Inventory Systems https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-278?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_conten… SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT DOD Faces Risks and Challenges in Implementing Modern Approaches and Addressing Cybersecurity Practices https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-351?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_conten… All the Best Diego -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://www.isti.cnr.it/People/D.Latella - ph: +390506212982, mob: +39 348 8283101, fax: +390506212040 =================== The quest for a war-free world has a basic purpose: survival. But if in the process we learn how to achieve it by love rather than by fear, by kindness rather than compulsion; if in the process we learn how to combine the essential with the enjoyable, the expedient with the benevolent, the practical with the beautiful, this will be an extra incentive to embark on this great task. Above all, remember your humanity. -- Sir Joseph Rotblat I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

June 28, 2021

Re: [nexa] La singolarità tecnologica nell’intelligenza artificiale

by don Luca Peyron

Eh sì... abbiamo un complesso di inferiorità prometeico che non riusciamo a vincere, o meglio lo potremmo vincere, lo abbiamo anche vinto... ma i temi dal libro della Genesi in poi non sono necessariamente il tema di questa lista! dl Il giorno dom 27 giu 2021 alle ore 10:41 Stefano Quintarelli < stefano(a)quintarelli.it> ha scritto: > Però sempre con il mito della super intelligenza. > > In data 26 giugno 2021 17:58:52 don Luca Peyron > <dluca.universitari(a)gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > Un buon pezzo divulgativo per comprendere lo stato dell'arte per chi è > più > > spettatore che protagonista dell'arte di cui si parla. > > > > Buona lettura > > > > dl > > > > > https://www.ai4business.it/intelligenza-artificiale/la-singolarita-tecnolog… > > _________________________ > > don Luca Peyron > > Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria > > Arcidiocesi di Torino > > www.universitari.to.it > > via XX settembre 83, Torino > > tel. 011 5156239 > > > > > > > > ---------- > > _______________________________________________ > > nexa mailing list > > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > -- _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

June 27, 2021

Re: [nexa] La singolarità tecnologica nell’intelligenza artificiale

by Stefano Quintarelli

Però sempre con il mito della super intelligenza. In data 26 giugno 2021 17:58:52 don Luca Peyron <dluca.universitari(a)gmail.com> ha scritto: > Un buon pezzo divulgativo per comprendere lo stato dell'arte per chi è più > spettatore che protagonista dell'arte di cui si parla. > > Buona lettura > > dl > > https://www.ai4business.it/intelligenza-artificiale/la-singolarita-tecnolog… > _________________________ > don Luca Peyron > Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria > Arcidiocesi di Torino > www.universitari.to.it > via XX settembre 83, Torino > tel. 011 5156239 > > > > ---------- > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 27, 2021

Re: [nexa] The European Legislation on AI: A Brief Analysis of its Philosophical Approach (di Luciano Floridi)

by Antonio Iacono

> Locuzioni altisonanti e fantasiose come "Artificial Intelligence", > "Machine Learning" o "Deep Learning" costituiscono arcane formule > magiche per impressionare gli sciocchi ... "La macchina ha le stesse funzioni delle immagini magiche presso le civiltà antiche: esse erano ritenute pregne dell'intenzione di chi le aveva foggiate, e efficaci su chiunque le contemplasse. Una macchina contiene in se stessa una magia cui soltanto una mente desta, cioé ben rara, può resistere opponendo una gerarchia morale dei fini: una macchina è una tentazione. Perciò non ha senso considerarla come fosse un oggetto inerte moralmente neutro: lo è quanto gli idoli nei tempi antichi. 'Idola gentium argentum et aurum similes fiunt qui confidunt in eis ... oculos habent et non vident, aures habent et non audiunt' dice il Salmo, e questa sublime filosofia si traspone senza difficoltà alle macchine, gl'idoli del mondo moderno: da un canto certamente né odono né vedono, sono pura materia, dall'altro verso sono assai efficaci perché simili a loro diventano quanti in loro confidano. Meccanico diventa l'animo di chi ponga fiducia nelle macchine come meri e perfetti servitori automatici, innocenti e incapaci di modificare chi le usa." Elemire Zolla (1965)

June 26, 2021