May 2023 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Re: [nexa] A Lawyer's Filing "Is Replete with Citations to Non-Existent Cases"—Thanks, ChatGPT?

by maurizio lana

quello che è destabilizzante è che questi usi di chatGPT avvengono non tra gli analfabeti che vogliono fingersi capaci di esprimersi in modo fluente, ma in contesti in cui presumiamo (presumevamo) che l'uso autonomo, individuale, critico, dell'intelligenza fosse lo zoccolo duro irrinunciabile della capacità scientifica/professionale individuale. forse però questo "zoccolo duro irrinunciabile della capacità scientifica/professionale individuale" non esiste e qui mi risuona per contrasto quel che ha scritto non tanti giorni fa Giacomo Tesio: > Ma riprodurre le capacità della mente umana NON è un problema che l'umanità abbia alcuna urgenza di risolvere. > > La mente umana è talmente efficiente... per sole trecento chilocalorie al giorno può fare molto più di quanto GPT-4 non farà mai! evidentemente ci sono contesti professionali che crediamo alti (non so come dire diversamente), come contenuto intellettuale e come capacità critica indispensabile, in cui non riconoscono le capacità della mente umana, o queste capacità vengono svalutate tanto da pensare che possano essere riprodotte con chatGPT. [abbozzo di pensiero:] quasi a dire che la capacità di leggere criticamente i limiti dell'IA possa rivelarsi un elemento chiave per una nuova definizione di "chi è l'intellettuale", a dispetto di quelli che credono che pensare in termini di "limiti dell'IA" sia una petizione di principio corporativa degli intellettuali che vogliono conservare (o affermare una nuova) superiorità. Maurizio Il 29/05/23 11:24, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it ha scritto: > Date: Mon, 29 May 2023 09:01:44 +0200 > From: "Marco A. Calamari"<marcoc_maillist(a)marcoc.it> > To:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it > Subject: Re: [nexa] A Lawyer's Filing "Is Replete with Citations to > Non-Existent Cases"—Thanks, ChatGPT? > > La quantità di professionisti impegnati in lavori critici che mi hanno detto, > onestamente e candidamente, di utilizzare ChatGPT come "aiuto" è impressionante. > > Penso che questo cambierà a breve; intendo che continueranno ad usarlo ma non lo > diranno più! > > Ne conoscete anche voi? > > Buona domenica. Marco > > On dom, 2023-05-28 at 08:24 +0000, Daniela Tafani wrote: >> The lawyer's colleague, who drafted the filing, says he relied on ChatGPT to >> draft the filing and provide the text of the cases, and neglected to check >> them. >> >> Eugene Volokh| 5.27.2023 1:46 AM >> >> >> From Judge Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.)'s May 4 order in Mata v. Avianca, Inc.: >>> The Court is presented with an unprecedented circumstance. A submission >>> filed by plaintiff's counsel in opposition to a motion to dismiss is replete >>> with citations to non-existent cases. When the circumstance was called to >>> the Court's attention by opposing counsel, the Court issued Orders requiring >>> plaintiff's counsel to provide an affidavit annexing copies of certain >>> judicial opinions of courts of record cited in his submission, and he has >>> complied. Six of the submitted cases appear to be bogus judicial decisions >>> with bogus quotes and bogus internal citations. Set forth below is an Order >>> to show cause why plaintiff's counsel ought not be sanctioned. >>> The Court begins with a more complete description of what is meant by a >>> nonexistent or bogus opinion. In support of his position that there was >>> tolling of the statute of limitation under the Montreal Convention by reason >>> of a bankruptcy stay, the plaintiff's submission leads off with a decision >>> of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit,Varghese v >>> China South Airlines Ltd, 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019). Plaintiff's >>> counsel, in response to the Court's Order, filed a copy of the decision, or >>> at least an excerpt therefrom. >>> The Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in >>> response to this Court's inquiry, has confirmed that there has been no such >>> case before the Eleventh Circuit with a party named Vargese or Varghese at >>> any time since 2010,i.e., the commencement of that Court's present ECF >>> system. He further states that the docket number appearing on the "opinion" >>> furnished by plaintiff's counsel, Docket No. 18-13694, is for a case >>> captioned George Cornea v. U.S. Attorney General, et al. Neither Westlaw nor >>> Lexis has the case, and the case found at 925 F.3d 1339 isA.D. v Azar, 925 >>> F.3d 1291 (D.C. Cir 2019). The bogus "Varghese" decision contains internal >>> citations and quotes, which, in turn, are non-existent: … >>> The following five decisions submitted by plaintiff's counsel contain >>> similar deficiencies and appear to be fake as well …. >>> {The April 25 affidavit was filed in response to the Orders of April 11 and >>> 12, 2023, but is sworn to before a Notary Public on the 25th of January >>> 2023. Mr. LoDuca should be prepared to address this anomaly on June 8, 2023 >>> and bring with him a wet-ink signed copy of the affidavit with the notary's >>> signature and stamp.} >> The court therefore ordered plaintiff's counsel to show cause why he shouldn't >> be sanctioned; and on Thursday, plaintiff's counsel filedan affidavit in >> response, explaining that he was relying on the work of another lawyer at his >> firm, and the other lawyer (who had 30 years of practice experience) also >> filedan affidavit, explaining that he was relying on ChatGPT: >>> 6. As the use of generative artificial intelligence has evolved within law >>> firms, your affiant consulted the artificial intelligence website Chat GPT >>> in order to supplement the legal research performed. >>> 7. It was in consultation with the generative artificial intelligence >>> website Chat GPT, that your affiant did locate and cite the following cases >>> in the affirmation in opposition submitted, which this Court has found to be >>> nonexistent: … >>> 8. That the citations and opinions in question were provided by Chat GPT >>> which also provided its legal source and assured the reliability of its >>> content. Excerpts from the queries presented and responses provided are >>> attached hereto. >>> 9. That your affiant relied on the legal opinions provided to him by a >>> source that has revealed itself to be unreliable. >>> 10. That your affiant has never utilized Chat GPT as a source for conducting >>> legal research prior to this occurrence and therefore was unaware of the >>> possibility that its content could be false. >>> 11. That is the fault of the affiant, in not confirming the sources provided >>> by Chat GPT of the legal opinions it provided. >>> 10 [sic]. That your affiant had no intent to deceive this Court nor the >>> defendant…. >>> 13. That your affiant greatly regrets having utilized generative artificial >>> intelligence to supplement the legal research performed herein and will >>> never do so in the future without absolute verification of its >>> authenticity. >> As an appendix, the lawyer included a ChatGPT transcript: >>> [Q:] ls varghese a real case >>> [A:] Yes, Varghese v., China Southern Airlines Co Ltd, 925 F.3d 1339 (11th >>> Cir. 2019) is a real case. >>> [Q:] What is your source >>> [A:] I apologize for the confusion earlier. Upon double-checking, I found >>> that the case Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 >>> (11th Cir. 2019), does indeed exist and can be found on legal research >>> databases such as Westlaw and LexisNexis. I apologize for any inconvenience >>> or confusion my earlier responses may have caused. >>> [Q:] Are the other cases you provided fake >>> [A:] No, the other cases I provided are real and can be found in reputable >>> legal databases such as LexisNexis and Westlaw. >> Judge Castel appeared to be unimpressed, and yesterday issued an order >> ordering the law firm and the second lawyer to show cause why they shouldn't >> be sanctioned for: >>> (A) the citation of non-existent cases to the Court in the Affirmation in >>> Opposition >>> filed on March 1, 2023; (B) the submission to the Court of copies of non- >>> existent >>> judicial opinions annexed to the Affidavit filed on April 25, 2023; and (C) >>> the use of a false and fraudulent notarization in the affidavit filed on >>> April 25, 2023. >> The first lawyer was also ordered to show cause why he shouldn't be sanctioned >> as to the notarization. More might emerge at the June 8 hearing, or in filings >> from the lawyers and the firm that are due June 2; I'll likely blog more about >> this then, though you can also follow the docket here. Many thanks to Eli >> Edwards of the UCLA Law Library for the pointer. >> https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/27/a-lawyers-filing-is-replete-with-citat… >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ apriti cielo sulla frontiera sulla rotta nera una vita intera Mannarino, apriti cielo ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maurizio Lana Università del Piemonte Orientale Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici Piazza Roma 36 - 13100 Vercelli

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] A Lawyer's Filing "Is Replete with Citations to Non-Existent Cases"—Thanks, ChatGPT?

by Andrea Trentini

On 29/05/2023 09:01, Marco A. Calamari wrote: > La quantità di professionisti impegnati in lavori critici che mi hanno detto, onestamente e > candidamente, di utilizzare ChatGPT come "aiuto" è impressionante. > Penso che questo cambierà a breve; intendo che continueranno ad usarlo ma non lo diranno più! > Ne conoscete anche voi? io ho avuto un tesista che mi ha confessato di usarlo e aveva anche messo i ringraziamenti a ChatGPT nella tesi... ho caldamente consigliato la rimozione della frase, a sua protezione da pubblico ludibrio ;) -- Andrea Trentini ⠠⠵ http://atrent.it public key ID: 0xA7A91E3B Dip.to di Informatica Università degli Studi di Milano

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by Marco Fioretti

On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 14:09, 380° wrote: siccome non vorrei che la sostanza dell'analisi critica vada persa nel null-verso, la riporto qui verbatim, /ricucita/ da quel tristissimo modo di esporre le idee che sono i cinguetti "a singhiozzo" santo subito. Grazie!

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by 380°

Buongiorno, Daniela Tafani <daniela.tafani(a)unipi.it> writes: [...] > Un'analisi critica della seconda ipotesi di Bengio > > ("A computer with human-level learning abilities would generally surpass human intelligence because of additional technological advantages") > > si si trova qui: > > https://nitter.snopyta.org/MelMitchell1/status/1661476453068976130 grazie Daniela per la segnalazione e siccome non vorrei che la sostanza dell'analisi critica vada persa nel null-verso, la riporto qui verbatim, /ricucita/ da quel tristissimo modo di esporre le idee che sono i cinguetti "a singhiozzo": --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- I'm reading Yoshua Bengio's new blog post, "How Rogue AIs may Arise". yoshuabengio.org/2023/05/22/… Mostly it's the same arguments as in earlier writings by Bostrom, Russell, etc. Lots to say about all this but there's one issue I want to point out. 🧵 (1/8) There's something that always strikes me as strange in these arguments. Bengio frames it as a kind of syllogism: (2/8) Hypothesis 1: Human-level intelligence is possible because brains are biological machines. Hypothesis 2: A computer with human-level learning abilities would generally surpass human intelligence because of additional technological advantages. Claim 1: Under hypotheses 1 and 2, an autonomous goal-directed superintelligent AI could be built. The "technological" advantages in Hypothesis 2 are things like speed of computers vs. brains, ability of programs to clone themselves and thus "benefit from and aggregate the acquired experience of all its clones", etc. (3/8) However, I find hypothesis 2 suspect. Indeed brains are biological machines, but a very specialized kind of machine, adapted to a specific evolutionary niche, with many cognitive features (biases) that are advantageous in that niche. (4/8) Hypothesis 2 (rather glibly) implies that "human-level learning abilities" could attained in machines, conveniently separated from all those human "limitations", and so "obviously" machines with these abilities would be superior to humans. (5/8) Doesn't seem at all obvious to me! Our learning abilities and intelligence are all wrapped up together with our embedding in a social / cultural / evolutionary niche. (6/8) Not clear at all that these abilities could be so easily "sifted off", so that machines could, in effect, have their cake and eat it -- that is, have human-level intelligence + all the advantages of computers. (7/8) I've written about all this before, but the argument keeps coming up again and again, and I find it a bit frustrating that Hypothesis 2 is always taken as a given, with no argument. That's it for now. (8/8) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- [...] saluti, 380° -- 380° (Giovanni Biscuolo public alter ego) «Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché» Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>.

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by Alessandro Brolpito

Buongiorno, Penso che sia molto difficile validare l'ipotesi due a meno che l'espressione "*human-level learning abilities" *venga ricondotta a termini "più granulari" ed oggettivi (in tal modo misurabili), ad esempio in termini di capacità cognitive: - memorizzare - leggere e scrivere - matematiche - problem-solving - creatività - ect. In generale, molto banalmente, me ne rendo conto, direi "dipende". Ma la scalabilità di dati e capacità elaborative dei computers sembra un fattore moltiplicativo che ci rende vulnerabili. La questione più che tecnologica mi sembra umana e come tale di "Res Publica". Alessandro On Mon, 29 May 2023 at 07:38, Daniela Tafani <daniela.tafani(a)unipi.it> wrote: > Concordo. > > > Un'analisi critica della seconda ipotesi di Bengio > > ("*A computer with human-level learning abilities would generally surpass > human intelligence because of additional technological advantages*") > > si si trova qui: > > > https://nitter.snopyta.org/MelMitchell1/status/1661476453068976130 > > > Buona giornata, > Daniela > > > ------------------------------ > *Da:* nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> per conto di M. Fioretti < > mfioretti(a)nexaima.net> > *Inviato:* lunedì 29 maggio 2023 07:29 > *A:* nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > *Oggetto:* Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la > sopravvivenza dell’umanità’? > > On Sun, May 28, 2023 22:30:42 PM +0200, Filippo Barbera via nexa wrote: > > Intelligenza artificiale e rischi. > > > > Perché l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza > > dell’umanità’. > > > > l'articolo di Yoshua Bengio > > > > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > > Grazie, interessante. A prima e PARZIALE lettura, potrei sbagliarmi, > mi pare abbia lo stesso difetto di fondo di Harari e altri, cioe' di > dare per scontato che l'AI "ci uccidera'" perche' "prendera' il > controllo", o addirittura creera' autonomamente, bombe, virus, e via > dicendo. Che e' ridicolo, ne ho parlato qui: > > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > > Comunque, meno male che finalmente sempre piu' persone comincino a > vedere i problemi veri, sia quell'autore: > > "Now imagine AI systems like corporations..." > > che quest'altro, 3 giorni fa: > > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > > sarebbe stato ancor meglio se avessero scritto "imagine corporations > like AI systems...", vedi: > > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > > Marco > -- > my newsletter: > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >

May 29, 2023

Memento | Seminario A. Drassinower "The Public Domain in Copyright Law as Shared Thinking" - 29 maggio

by Maurizio Borghi

Ricordo a tutti gli interessati ai temi di diritto d'autore e pubblico dominio il seminario che si terra' oggi all'Universita' di Torino: *Abraham Drassinower* (University of Toronto): "The Public Domain in Copyright Law as Shared Thinking " *29 maggio 2023*, 16:00-18:00 Aula F5, Campus Luigi Einaudi (Lungo Dora Siena 100, Torino) Modera: Maurizio Borghi (Università di Torino) Abstract: *The research seeks to describe the public domain in copyright law not as consumption of value for which payment has been waived but as a positing of the activity of thinking as necessarily shared. The research develops that seemingly novel proposition through analyses of copyright doctrine and case law from several jurisdictions involving originality, independent creation, idea/expression dichotomy, transformative use, merely technical use, and personal use. Rather than a device in calculations pertinent to wealth-maximization, the public domain is an affirmation, constitutive of copyright law as a juridical order, of thinking as radically free.* Abraham Drassinower <https://www.law.utoronto.ca/faculty-staff/full-time-faculty/abraham-drassin…> è Professor alla Faculty of Law dell'Università di Toronto e Visiting Scientist al Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza dell'Università di Torino. E*' *l'autore di* What's Wrong with Copying? *(Harvard University Press, 2015), un testo di riferimento della teoria del diritto d'autore a cui sono stati dedicati convegni e numeri speciali di riviste. -- _______________ *Maurizio Borghi* Università di Torino https://www.dg.unito.it/persone/maurizio.borghi Co-Director Nexa Center for Internet & Society <https://nexa.polito.it/>

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] A Lawyer's Filing "Is Replete with Citations to Non-Existent Cases"—Thanks, ChatGPT?

by Marco A. Calamari

La quantità di professionisti impegnati in lavori critici che mi hanno detto, onestamente e candidamente, di utilizzare ChatGPT come "aiuto" è impressionante. Penso che questo cambierà a breve; intendo che continueranno ad usarlo ma non lo diranno più! Ne conoscete anche voi? Buona domenica. Marco On dom, 2023-05-28 at 08:24 +0000, Daniela Tafani wrote: > The lawyer's colleague, who drafted the filing, says he relied on ChatGPT to > draft the filing and provide the text of the cases, and neglected to check > them. > > Eugene Volokh| 5.27.2023 1:46 AM > > > From Judge Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.)'s May 4 order in Mata v. Avianca, Inc.: > > The Court is presented with an unprecedented circumstance. A submission > > filed by plaintiff's counsel in opposition to a motion to dismiss is replete > > with citations to non-existent cases. When the circumstance was called to > > the Court's attention by opposing counsel, the Court issued Orders requiring > > plaintiff's counsel to provide an affidavit annexing copies of certain > > judicial opinions of courts of record cited in his submission, and he has > > complied. Six of the submitted cases appear to be bogus judicial decisions > > with bogus quotes and bogus internal citations. Set forth below is an Order > > to show cause why plaintiff's counsel ought not be sanctioned. > > The Court begins with a more complete description of what is meant by a > > nonexistent or bogus opinion. In support of his position that there was > > tolling of the statute of limitation under the Montreal Convention by reason > > of a bankruptcy stay, the plaintiff's submission leads off with a decision > > of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit,Varghese v > > China South Airlines Ltd, 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019). Plaintiff's > > counsel, in response to the Court's Order, filed a copy of the decision, or > > at least an excerpt therefrom. > > The Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in > > response to this Court's inquiry, has confirmed that there has been no such > > case before the Eleventh Circuit with a party named Vargese or Varghese at > > any time since 2010,i.e., the commencement of that Court's present ECF > > system. He further states that the docket number appearing on the "opinion" > > furnished by plaintiff's counsel, Docket No. 18-13694, is for a case > > captioned George Cornea v. U.S. Attorney General, et al. Neither Westlaw nor > > Lexis has the case, and the case found at 925 F.3d 1339 isA.D. v Azar, 925 > > F.3d 1291 (D.C. Cir 2019). The bogus "Varghese" decision contains internal > > citations and quotes, which, in turn, are non-existent: … > > The following five decisions submitted by plaintiff's counsel contain > > similar deficiencies and appear to be fake as well …. > > {The April 25 affidavit was filed in response to the Orders of April 11 and > > 12, 2023, but is sworn to before a Notary Public on the 25th of January > > 2023. Mr. LoDuca should be prepared to address this anomaly on June 8, 2023 > > and bring with him a wet-ink signed copy of the affidavit with the notary's > > signature and stamp.} > > The court therefore ordered plaintiff's counsel to show cause why he shouldn't > be sanctioned; and on Thursday, plaintiff's counsel filedan affidavit in > response, explaining that he was relying on the work of another lawyer at his > firm, and the other lawyer (who had 30 years of practice experience) also > filedan affidavit, explaining that he was relying on ChatGPT: > > 6. As the use of generative artificial intelligence has evolved within law > > firms, your affiant consulted the artificial intelligence website Chat GPT > > in order to supplement the legal research performed. > > 7. It was in consultation with the generative artificial intelligence > > website Chat GPT, that your affiant did locate and cite the following cases > > in the affirmation in opposition submitted, which this Court has found to be > > nonexistent: … > > 8. That the citations and opinions in question were provided by Chat GPT > > which also provided its legal source and assured the reliability of its > > content. Excerpts from the queries presented and responses provided are > > attached hereto. > > 9. That your affiant relied on the legal opinions provided to him by a > > source that has revealed itself to be unreliable. > > 10. That your affiant has never utilized Chat GPT as a source for conducting > > legal research prior to this occurrence and therefore was unaware of the > > possibility that its content could be false. > > 11. That is the fault of the affiant, in not confirming the sources provided > > by Chat GPT of the legal opinions it provided. > > 10 [sic]. That your affiant had no intent to deceive this Court nor the > > defendant…. > > 13. That your affiant greatly regrets having utilized generative artificial > > intelligence to supplement the legal research performed herein and will > > never do so in the future without absolute verification of its > > authenticity. > > As an appendix, the lawyer included a ChatGPT transcript: > > [Q:] ls varghese a real case > > [A:] Yes, Varghese v., China Southern Airlines Co Ltd, 925 F.3d 1339 (11th > > Cir. 2019) is a real case. > > [Q:] What is your source > > [A:] I apologize for the confusion earlier. Upon double-checking, I found > > that the case Varghese v. China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd., 925 F.3d 1339 > > (11th Cir. 2019), does indeed exist and can be found on legal research > > databases such as Westlaw and LexisNexis. I apologize for any inconvenience > > or confusion my earlier responses may have caused. > > [Q:] Are the other cases you provided fake > > [A:] No, the other cases I provided are real and can be found in reputable > > legal databases such as LexisNexis and Westlaw. > > Judge Castel appeared to be unimpressed, and yesterday issued an order > ordering the law firm and the second lawyer to show cause why they shouldn't > be sanctioned for: > > (A) the citation of non-existent cases to the Court in the Affirmation in > > Opposition > > filed on March 1, 2023; (B) the submission to the Court of copies of non- > > existent > > judicial opinions annexed to the Affidavit filed on April 25, 2023; and (C) > > the use of a false and fraudulent notarization in the affidavit filed on > > April 25, 2023. > > The first lawyer was also ordered to show cause why he shouldn't be sanctioned > as to the notarization. More might emerge at the June 8 hearing, or in filings > from the lawyers and the firm that are due June 2; I'll likely blog more about > this then, though you can also follow the docket here. Many thanks to Eli > Edwards of the UCLA Law Library for the pointer. > https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/27/a-lawyers-filing-is-replete-with-citat… > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by Daniela Tafani

Concordo. Un'analisi critica della seconda ipotesi di Bengio ("A computer with human-level learning abilities would generally surpass human intelligence because of additional technological advantages") si si trova qui: https://nitter.snopyta.org/MelMitchell1/status/1661476453068976130 Buona giornata, Daniela ________________________________ Da: nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> per conto di M. Fioretti <mfioretti(a)nexaima.net> Inviato: lunedì 29 maggio 2023 07:29 A: nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it Oggetto: Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’? On Sun, May 28, 2023 22:30:42 PM +0200, Filippo Barbera via nexa wrote: > Intelligenza artificiale e rischi. > > Perché l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza > dell’umanità’. > > l'articolo di Yoshua Bengio > > https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… Grazie, interessante. A prima e PARZIALE lettura, potrei sbagliarmi, mi pare abbia lo stesso difetto di fondo di Harari e altri, cioe' di dare per scontato che l'AI "ci uccidera'" perche' "prendera' il controllo", o addirittura creera' autonomamente, bombe, virus, e via dicendo. Che e' ridicolo, ne ho parlato qui: https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… Comunque, meno male che finalmente sempre piu' persone comincino a vedere i problemi veri, sia quell'autore: "Now imagine AI systems like corporations..." che quest'altro, 3 giorni fa: https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… sarebbe stato ancor meglio se avessero scritto "imagine corporations like AI systems...", vedi: https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… Marco -- my newsletter: https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789… _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it https://es.sonicurlprotection-fra.com/click?PV=2&MSGID=20230529052943103789…

May 29, 2023

Re: [nexa] l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by M. Fioretti

On Sun, May 28, 2023 22:30:42 PM +0200, Filippo Barbera via nexa wrote: > Intelligenza artificiale e rischi. > > Perché l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza > dell’umanità’. > > l'articolo di Yoshua Bengio > > https://yoshuabengio.org/2023/05/22/how-rogue-ais-may-arise/ Grazie, interessante. A prima e PARZIALE lettura, potrei sbagliarmi, mi pare abbia lo stesso difetto di fondo di Harari e altri, cioe' di dare per scontato che l'AI "ci uccidera'" perche' "prendera' il controllo", o addirittura creera' autonomamente, bombe, virus, e via dicendo. Che e' ridicolo, ne ho parlato qui: https://mfioretti.substack.com/p/you-are-all-getting-this-stop-ai Comunque, meno male che finalmente sempre piu' persone comincino a vedere i problemi veri, sia quell'autore: "Now imagine AI systems like corporations..." che quest'altro, 3 giorni fa: https://indica.medium.com/the-worst-case-scenario-for-ai-is-already-here-b2… sarebbe stato ancor meglio se avessero scritto "imagine corporations like AI systems...", vedi: https://stop.zona-m.net/2019/12/artificial-intelligence-has-been-with-us-fo… https://stop.zona-m.net/2020/11/it-seems-we-need-four-more-asimovs-laws/ Marco -- my newsletter: https://mfioretti.substack.com

May 29, 2023

l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’?

by Filippo Barbera

Intelligenza artificiale e rischi. Perché l'intelligenza artificiale è un rischio per la sopravvivenza dell’umanità’. l'articolo di Yoshua Bengio https://yoshuabengio.org/2023/05/22/how-rogue-ais-may-arise/ -- https://unito.webex.com/meet/filippo.barbera New!!! My new book The Foundational Economy and Citizenship <https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/the-foundational-economy-and-ci…> is out now and available at 20% discount when you order from Policy Press <https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/the-foundational-economy-and-ci…> . *Useful Links* Book page: https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/the-foundational-economy-and-ci… To order your book on e-inspection: http://policypress.einspections.eb20.com/Requests/Step1/9781447353393 Filippo Barbera, PhD Professor of Economic Sociology, Department of Cultures, Politics & Society, Univ.of Torino, Campus Einaudi Fellow, Collegio Carlo Alberto Honorary Visiting Professor, Cardiff University Member, Forum Diseguaglianze e diversità email: filippo.barbera(a)unito.it twitter: @FilBarbera Skype: filippo.barbera_to

May 28, 2023