July 2023 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

traduzione, tradimento e language models
by Guido Vetere July 14, 2023

July 14, 2023

Care e cari, La Stampa di qualche giorno fa riportava un'intervista di Silvia Pareschi sul tema della traduzione automatica. Qui un mio commento <https://ilmanifesto.it/tradurre-e-un-po-tradire-ecco-perche-lintelligenza-u…> apparso oggi sul Manifesto Buona estate, compatibilmente Guido

1 0

Fran Drescher’s fiery speech against Hollywood studios goes viral as actors strike | US actors' strike 2023 | The Guardian
by Alberto Cammozzo July 14, 2023

July 14, 2023

<https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/jul/14/fran-drescher-speech-actors…> Fran Drescher has blasted Hollywood studios in a fiery speech after talks between the actors’ union and studios failed to avert a strike, calling them “disgusting” for claiming “they’re losing money left and right when giving hundreds of millions of dollars to their CEOs”. In a speech that was widely circulated on Thursday – particularly among many who did not know The Nanny star was heading up Sag-Aftra, Hollywood’s biggest union – Drescher said actors were being “marginalised, disrespected and dishonoured” by a business model that has been drastically changed by streaming and artificial intelligence. “What happens here is important because what’s happening to us is happening across all fields of labor, when employers make Wall Street and greed their priority and they forget about the essential contributors that make the machine run,” she said. “We are the victims here. We are being victimised by a very greedy entity. I am shocked by the way the people that we have been in business with are treating us. “I cannot believe it, quite frankly, how far apart we are on so many things. How they plead poverty, that they’re losing money left and right when giving hundreds of millions of dollars to their CEOs. It is disgusting. Shame on them. They stand on the wrong side of history.” On Thursday it was announced that 160,000 Sag-Aftra members – from big stars to background actors – will be joining the Writers Guild of America in a strike, marking the biggest shutdown of Hollywood since both unions last went on strike together in 1960. The unions are fighting for better terms with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, an entity that represents major studios and streamers, including Amazon, Apple, Disney, NBCUniversal, Netflix, Paramount, Sony and Warner Bros Discovery. Drescher, who became union president in 2021, has long expressed concerns about corporate greed, captioning photos with slogans like “STOP CAPITALIST GREED NOW” and tweeting sentiments including: “Capitalism has become another word for Ruling Class Elite!” In 2017 New York Magazine ran the headline: “Your New Favorite Anti-Capitalist Icon Is Fran Drescher.” Drescher also described herself as “anti-capitalist” in an interview with Vulture that year, saying: “I’m not anti-making-money, don’t get me wrong. I don’t think making money is a bad thing, per se. But it has to be calibrated within the spectrum of what’s a true value. “What I really tell people is, ‘you might be the first ones at a global-warming rally, but meanwhile, do you know what’s in your investment portfolio?’ We need to not be supporting these companies at all.” Drescher’s speech on Thursday was off-the-cuff, with the 65-year-old actor shaking her fists and sometimes blinking away tears. “Wake up and smell the coffee,” she told the studios. “We demand respect! You cannot exist without us!” Fran Drescher becoming one of the consequential union leaders of our time is an arc I am absolutely delighted by as both a union gal and a '90s kid. — Emily St. James (@emilystjams) July 13, 2023 Sag-Aftra members have been ordered to stop any work connected to productions, including red carpets and promoting their work on social media. The London premiere of Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer was pulled forward one hour to avoid the start of the strike, with the cast leaving during the film as it was officially announced. On Twitter Bette Midler criticised tech companies in a thread listing the many industries that were being hurt, before focusing on Hollywood. “The actors are right to strike, as are the writers,” she wrote. “If you want to devalue and destroy an industry, it’s no longer a sustainable business model.” Cynthia Nixon tweeted that she is “proud to be standing tall” with the WGA and that studios that have been “reaping from our labor for far too long”. She added: “We will win this!” Jamie Lee Curtis shared an Instagram post that read: “It’s time to take down the MASKS and pick up the SIGNS”.

1 0

Re: [nexa] (no subject)
by Giuseppe Attardi July 13, 2023

July 13, 2023

Sono stato impreciso nel titolo, ma la sostanza era quella: Il Sistema Informatico di Ateneo è individuato quale struttura responsabile per la transizione al digitale e il prof. Antonio Cisternino, in quanto Presidente del Sistema Informatico di Ateneo, è nominato Responsabile per la Transizione al Digitale fino al 31 ottobre 2020. — Beppe > On 3 Jul 2023, at 12:46, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it wrote: > Solo per la precisione, vsto che sono stata nominata: il dottor > Cisternino non è prorettore all'informatica. > https://unimap.unipi.it/organizzazione/organi.php?f=1CEN@F

1 0

To Help Cool a Hot Planet, the Whitest of White Coats
by Luigi Scorca July 13, 2023

July 13, 2023

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/climate/white-paint-climate-cooling.html

1 0

New Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework largely a copy of "Privacy Shield". noyb will challenge the decision.
by Alberto Cammozzo July 13, 2023

July 13, 2023

Conformità ottenuta tramite ingegneria semantica del termine 'proportionate'. <https://noyb.eu/en/european-commission-gives-eu-us-data-transfers-third-rou…> Third attempt of the European Commission to get a stable agreement on EU-US data transfers will be likely back at the Court of Justice (CJEU) in a matter of months. The allegedly "new" Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework is largely a copy of the failed "Privacy Shield". Despite the European Commission's public relations efforts, there is little change in US law or the approach taken by the EU. The fundamental problem with FISA 702 was not addressed by the US, as the US still takes the view that only US persons are worthy of constitutional rights. Comparison of the change in US law since 2014: * o "Old" PPD-28 (2014) <https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/01/17/presidenti…> o "New" EO 14086, replacing PPD-28 (2022) <https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-10-14/pdf/2022-22531.pdf> * Comparison with previous public relation efforts: o "Rebuilding Trust in EU-US Data Flows" and the "Umbrella" from 2013 <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:4d874331-784a-11e3-b889-…> o Press Statement on the "Privacy Shield" from 2016 <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_2461> o Media FAQs on the "Privacy Shield" from 2016 <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_16_2462> o Single Page "Agreement in Principle" between Biden and von der Leyen from 2022 <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/872132/Tra…> * European Commission Draft Adequacy Decision (December 2022) <https://noyb.eu/en/European Commission Draft Adequacy Decision (December 2022)> *Background.* In 2013 Edward Snowden disclosed that the US government used "big tech" companies and programs like "PRISM <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM>" or "Upstream <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstream_collection>" under FISA 702 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978…> and EO 12.333 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12333> to spy on the rest of the world without the need for probable cause or judicial approval. This was not limited to crime or terrorism, but also included espionage on "partners" of the US. Since a 1995 EU law, personal data may generally not be sent outside of the EU unless there is a "essentially equivalent" protection in the destination country. The US industry heavily relied on a European Commission Decision called "Safe Harbor" that declared the US "essentially equivalent" in 2000. The CJEU has annulled the Commission Decision in C-362/14 ("Schrems I") <https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?nat=or&mat=or&pcs=Oor&jur=C%2CT%2CF…> in 2015, given the vase US surveillance laws. In 2016 the European Commission has passed largely the same Decision on EU-US Data Transfers again, under the new name "Privacy Shield", which was invalidated by the CJEU in C-311/18 ("Schrems II") <https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?nat=or&mat=or&pcs=Oor&jur=C%2CT%2CF…> in 2020 largely on the same grounds. *Ursula's and Joe's "Magic" Tricks. *After the annulment of the "Privacy Shield" the negotiations between the EU and the US saw little progress. The US insisted that EU data would stay subject to US mass surveillance and "non-US" persons will /not /have the same protections as US persons. After little movement for more than 1.5 years, the US has reportedly used the war in Ukraine to put pressure on the EU on sharing personal data <https://www.politico.eu/article/us-eyes-breakthrough-on-data-dispute-with-e…>. Soon thereafter, Joe Biden and Ursula von der Leyen met on 25 March 2022. The same day, the two have suddenly "solved" what the lawyers were unable to solve and presented an "agreement in principle <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/872132/Tra…>", a one pager which in essence contained two "tricks" that should calm the public: * /First/, the CJEU found that*FISA 702 bulk surveillance being not "proportionate"* within the meaning of Article 52 of the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR). The "new" US Executive Order 14086 <https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-10-14/pdf/2022-22531.pdf> (which is largely equivalent to PPD-28 from 2014 <https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/01/17/presidenti…>) would now include the word "proportionate". The "trick" here: *the US will attribute another meaning to the word "proportionate" than the CJEU*. EO 14086 declares FISA 702 bulk surveillance to be "proportionate" under an undisclosed "US understanding" of the word and contrary to the two findings by the CJEU. This way the EU and the US were able to claim that they agreed on the same word ("proportionate") - even when there is no agreement on the meaning of the word. * /Secondly/, the CJEU found that *redress via the Privacy Shield "Ombudsperson"* was not even remotely complying with Article 47 CFR**- even when the Ombudsperson was hailed by the Commission public relations in 2016 as an "/independent/" form of "/redress in the area of national security/" <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_16_2462>. The "trick" on redress: the Ombudsperson mechanism was*renamed and split to a Civil Liberties Protection Officer (CLPO) and a so-called "Court"* (which is not a court, but a partly independent executive body). While there are some minor improvements over the Ombudsperson, the individual will not have any direct interaction with the new bodies (they will have to send a complaint to an EU data protection authority and not be heard by the US) and they will give the exact same response as the previous "Ombudsperson". Under EO 14086 the CLPO and the Court must in any case respond by saying: "/Without confirming or denying that the complainant was subject to United States signals intelligence activities, the review either did not identify any covered violations or the Data Protection Review Court issued a determination requiring appropriate remediation/" (see here <https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-22531/p-107>). The "judgment" of this "Court" is therefore known even before a case is brought. There are many additional problem with the mechanism, that will largely ensure that complaints will not even be admitted. It seems unthinkable that the Court of Justice would accept this as "judicial redress" under Article 47 CFR. * /Finally/, the*US has refused to reform FISA 702* to give non-US persons reasonable privacy protections. There is agreement on both sides of the Atlantic that FISA 702 and EO 12.333 violate fundamental rights under the 4th Amendment in the US and Articles 7, 8 and 47 CFR in the EU - but the US continues to insist that non-US persons do not have constitutional rights in the US - hence a violation of their right to privacy is not covered by the 4th Amendment. * *FISA 702 will have to be prolonged by the end of 2023*, given that there is a "sunset clause" in US law. This would have been the perfect opportunity to improve US law, but given the new deal with the EU, there will be little reason for the US to reform FISA 702. Overall the new "Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework" is a copy of Privacy Shield (from 2016), which in turn was a copy of "Safe Harbor" (from 2000). Given that this approach has failed twice before, there was no legal basis for the change of course - only logic of having a deal was political. Max Schrems, chair of /noyb/: "/They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Just like 'Privacy Shield' the latest deal is not based on material changes, but by political interests. Once again the current Commission seems to think that the mess will be the next Commission's problem. FISA 702 needs to be prolonged by the US this year, but with the announcement of the new deal the EU has lost any power to get a reform of FISA 702."/ *Fool me Thrice? *Already in the wake of the Snowden disclosures in 2013, the European Commission announced that it will "rebuild" trust <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:4d874331-784a-11e3-b889-…> and "/make Safe Harbor safer/" and come up with an "/umbrella agreement/".**In 2016 journalists were told that <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_16_2462> the "Privacy Shield" would mean that /"for the first time, the US has given the EU written assurance",/ that there would be /"clear limitations, safeguards and oversight mechanisms" /and even/"no indiscriminate mass surveillance". /None of these claims and systems has prove stable when put before the CJEU. In the current version of the Commission's public relations efforts, the same (ever-repeating) claims are entertained. Max Schrems: "/We now had 'Harbors', 'Umbrellas', 'Shields' and 'Frameworks' - but no substantial change in US surveillance law. The press statements of today are almost a literal copy of the once from the past 23 years. Just announcing that something is 'new', 'robust' or 'effective' does not cut it before the Court of Justice. We would need changes in US surveillance law to make this work - and we simply don't have it./" *CJEU challenge ready to be filed. *Anyone who's personal data will be transferred under the new deal can bring a challenge with Data Protection Authorities or Courts. /noyb /has prepared various procedural options to bring the new deal back before the CJEU. We expect the new system to be implemented by the first companies within the next months, which will open the path towards a challenge by a person who's data is transferred under the new instrument. It is not unlikely that a challenge would reach the CJEU by the end of 2023 or beginning of 2024. The CJEU would then even have the option to suspend the "Framework" for the time of the procedure. A final decision by the CJEU would be likely by 2024 or 2025. No matter if such a challenge will be successful, this will bring clarity to the "Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework" within about two years. Max Schrems:/"We have various options for a challenge already in the drawer, although we are sick and tired of this legal ping-pong. We currently expect this to be back at the Court of Justice by the beginning of next year. The Court of Justice could then even suspend the new deal while it is reviewing the substance of it. For the sake of legal certainty and the rule of law we will then get an answer if the Commission's tiny improvements were enough or not./ /For the past 23 years all EU-US deals were declared invalid retroactively, making all past data transfers by business illegal - we seem to just add another two years of this ping-pong now./" *EU Commission shows little care for rule of law and citizens' privacy. *This third attempt to pass largely the same unlawful decision also raises questions as to the larger role of the European Commission being the guardian of the EU treaties. Instead of upholding the 'rule of law' the Commission simply passes an invalid decision over and over again, despite clear rulings by the CJEU. Despite large outrage after the Snowden disclosures in the EU and repeated calls by the European Parliament to take action, the Commission seems to give the diplomatic relations with the US and business pressure on both side of the Atlantic the priority over the rights of Europeans and the requirements of EU law. Max Schrems: "/The Commission is meant to be the 'guardian of the treaties' and the defender or the 'rule of law'. It loves that role when it comes to Member States violating EU law. Now the Commission itself simply ignores the Court of Justice for the third time./"

3 4

China finalizes first-of-its-kind rules governing generative A.I. services like ChatGPT
by Zulu July 13, 2023

July 13, 2023

Di solito leggo i digest quotidiani, ma per la prima volta contribuisco anche io. Giusto scrivendo una parte su due casi di copyright infringement in Cina, notizie su generative AI! https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/13/china-introduces-rules-governing-generative… Buona giornata! Francesco M. -- *Francesco Mittica* Future Graduate, Global Law and Transnational Legal Studies MSOI Member AI Aficionado

1 0

AI revolution puts skilled jobs at highest risk, OECD says
by Luigi Scorca July 12, 2023

July 12, 2023

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/11/ai-revolution-puts-skill… Luigi

3 2

Pricing Algorithms Aren’t Colluding, Yet
by Luigi Scorca July 11, 2023

July 11, 2023

"Axel Gautier, Ashwin Ittoo, and Pieter van Cleynenbreugel write that the practice of pricing algorithms tacitly colluding remains theoretical for now, and technological obstacles render it very unlikely in the short term. However, regulators must still prepare for a future in which artificial intelligence achieves the necessary sophistication to collude." https://www.promarket.org/2023/07/11/pricing-algorithms-arent-colluding-yet/

1 0

proposte di collaborazione
by Angelo Raffaele Meo July 11, 2023

July 11, 2023

carissimi, colgo l'opportunità dell'incontro di domani, 12 luglio, per rinnovare una proposta di collaborazione a tutti gli amici di Nexa. Sicuramente domani non avremo il tempo necessario per discutere questa mia proposta, ma potremo approndire la questione durante le vacanzze estive via mail o videoconferenze remote. I capitoli più importanti della proposta hanno per oggetto: a) il nostro portale FARE; b) l'archivio nazionale delle O.E.R. (o "Open Education Resources", secondo la definizione di UNESCO). a). Il nostro prodotto "FARE". come "Free Architecture for Remote Education", sviluppato negli ultimi dieci anni da una gruppo di ricercatori e insegnanti operanti prevalentemente presso il Politecnico di Torino, , attualmente contiene: a) un archivio di oltre 2000 OER, che spero diventi il punto di partenza di un progetto nazionale che ho appena proposto all'Accademia delle Scienze e ad altri enti di ricerca; b) gli strumenti per creare o comporre nuove OER; c) gli strumenti per produrre nuovi MOOC ("Massive Open Online Courseware") che hanno vinto il secondo premio al concorso nazionale "TalentItaly" del MIUR; d) altri strumenti per l'attuazione dei nuovi modelli didattici come la "Flipped Classroom"; e) una linea di strumenti per la didattica a distanza che a noi pare superiore ai noti prodotti del mercato come Google o Microsoft. Queste funzionalità possono essere facillmente verificate con un collegamento a "testfare.polito.it". Se vi interessasse potrei inviarvi un documento tecnico analitico e il filmato di un mio intervento che ho avuto l'onore di fare a conclusione del progetto nazionale "Programmailfuturo", rivolto a tutte le scuole italiane da CINI e MIUR. In questo momento stiamo concludendo una fase della progettazione che consente ad una scuola una facile installazione di FARE sul proprio server in modo che la scuola possa fornire i servizi della "didattica a distanza" non soltanto ai propri allievi e insegnanti ma anche ad allievi e insegnanti di altre scuole. Inoltre stiamo avviando la ricerca per l'attuazione dell'integrazione di FARE nel nuovo innovativo modello della PDND,, ossia "Piattaforma Digitale Nazionale dei Dati", fortemente raccomandato dal Dipartimento della Funzione Pubblica. Inoltre, ovviamente, i nuovi strumenti per la didattica basati su intelligenza artificiale e robotica potranno essere integrati nel nostro portale. Per una felice circostanza, il modello del "Connected Learning Environment" descritto nel documento del PNRR "Scuola 4.0" ha esattamente le funzionalità di FARE. Di conseguenza, una scuola che adotti FARE può con piccole integrazioni candidarsi alla collaborazione con il PNRR. b) Alcuni autorevoli responsabili dell'Accademia delle Scienze di Torino e del Politecnico di Torino hanno manifestato grande interesse per la proposta di attuare in grande archicio nazionale dellle Open Education Resources. Ha manifestato grande interesse anche il noto giurista Marco Ciurcina che si è candidato alla guida del progetto con particolare attenzione agli aspetti della proprietà intellettuale e della "privacy". Il server dove sarà allocato l'archivio non avrà particolare esigenze dal punto di vista della banda trasmissiva e quindi potrà essere una macchina di basso costo. Il software necessario per la gestione del progetto è già disponibile, poichè è esattamente quello che attualmente gestisce l'archivio di FARE. Il lavoro più difficile è l'identificazione di almeno una ventina di "responsabili di area scientifica". Quando un operatore della scuola o, al limite, un autore, vorrà aggiungere all'archivio un nuovo "learning object", lo dovrà inviare al responsabile di quella area scientifica. Questo ultimo, dopo un'analisi del valore di quell'oggetto, lo installerà direttamente sull'archivio. A differenza del precedente punto a), agli amici di Nexa chiediamo ora non una collaborazione alla ricerca, ma all'insegnamento. Chiudo questa mail con una domanda finale (chiara manifestazione di "interesse privato in atti di ufficio"). Qualche amico ha letto o fatto leggere ad altri amici la mia dimostrazione sul "problema del millennio"? Con moltissimo affetto Raf

1 0

[CFP] ITC35 PhD Workshop - Travel Grants Available
by Martino Trevisan July 11, 2023

July 11, 2023

[Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this mail] **ITC35 PhD Workshop, co-located with the *35th International Teletraffic Congress “/Network Traffic Engineering in the TLC networks of the future/”* *Wednesday, October 4, 2023, Turin* *Website: https://itc35.itc-conference.org/* /_*CALL FOR PRESENTATIONS*_/ /Re-thinking fundamental networking functions, their modeling and their performance evaluation in the framework of the evolving Internet and cellular networks, in the era of cloud and content providers, is a target for the ITC community. The PhD workshop aims at fostering contributions and fresh ideas from young researchers, pursuing their PhD or having just completed their PhD. Discussion of their PhD ideas and progress, proposition of research challenges and directions is welcome during a dedicated workshop./ /_*TRAVEL GRANTS *_/ The International Advisory Committee (IAC) of the ITC has decided to offer a number of _/*travel grants*/_ (STG) that will be available to support full-time students for attending ITC 35th. The amount of each grant is *EUR 600* that can be used to cover student travel expenses related to attending ITC 35th conference, such as student registration fee, airline ticket, and hotel accommodation expenses./_* *_/ /_*SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS *_/ With respect to the presentation to be given during the Workshop, two contribution formats are solicited: * more *mature* research works, in the form of a long presentation (up to 20 min each); * short *in-progress* research work discussion, with a short presentation (up to 10 min each). Correspondingly, Authors proposing a long presentation are invited to submit an *extended abstract* (max 3 pages plus references, using the same format as for regular contributions to the main conference). Extended abstracts will be *published* along with conference proceedings. The best contribution will be invited for submission as a full paper to be *fast-track* reviewed for potential publication in a journal (to be determined). Authors proposing a short presentation are solicited to submit a title, list of Authors and a short abstract (up to 400 words), to help set up the workshop program. *Contribution should be sent in PDF format via email to:* * *Andrea Baiocchi:* andrea.baiocchi(a)uniroma1.it * *Lea Skorin-Kapov: *Lea.Skorin-Kapov(a)fer.hr /_*IMPORTANT DATES*_/* * * <https://itc35.itc-conference.org/> *Submission deadline*: August 10, 2023 (Extended) * *Notification of acceptance:* August 20, 2023 (Extended) * *Submission of camera-ready extended abstracts:* September 16, 2023 (Extended) Camera-ready versions should be uploaded as indicated with respect to camera-ready instructions /_*WORKSHOP CHAIRS*_/* * * *Andrea Baiocchi*, University of Rome, Italy * *Lea Skorin-Kapov*, University of Zagreb, Croatia For any questions do not hesitate to contact the conference organization under***itc35_oc(a)tlc.polito.it* /Best Regards,/ /*ITC 35 *//Organizing Team/

1 0