June 2024 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

The governance of digital platforms and Artificial Intelligence

by Dario Guarascio

Segnalo la conferenza 'The governance of digital platforms and Artificial Intelligence' è possibile seguire da remoto https://www.sns.it/en/node/378655 A presto dario -- *Dario Guarascio* Dipartimento di Economia e Diritto, Sapienza Università di Roma <http://www.uniroma1.it/strutture/dipartimenti> Via del Castro Laurenziano n° 9, 00161 Roma Edificio A (6° piano) -ala B, stanza n° 606 E-mail: dario.guarascio(a)uniroma1.it <nome.cognome(a)uniroma1.it> *Sito web* italiano - https://sites.google.com/a/uniroma1.it/darioguarascio/ inglese - https://sites.google.com/a/uniroma1.it/darioguarascio-eng/ -- *Fai crescere le giovani ricercatrici e i giovani ricercatori*** *con il 5 per mille alla Sapienza* Scrivi il codice fiscale dell'Università *80209930587 **Cinque per mille <https://www.uniroma1.it/it/node/23149>*

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by 380°

Buongiorno, Franco Marra <marrafranco(a)gmail.com> writes: > Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo > "stronzate". A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al > traduttore Google. La risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... mai fidarsi delle /stronzate/ che spara il traduttore di Google, non sa cosa dice :-) anche se spesso usata come sinonimo, la parola cazzata [1] non rende per nulla l'idea di quanto lo faccia bullshit, ovvero stronzata [2], la cui etimologia sia inglese che italiana [3] è chiarissima e richiama _anche_ l'odore che emana: https://www.etymonline.com/word/bullshit --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- also bull shit, "eloquent and insincere rhetoric," 1914, American English slang; see bull (n.1) + shit (n.), probably because it smells. But bull in the sense of "trivial or false statements" (1914), which usually is associated with this, might be a continuation of Middle English bull "false talk, fraud" (see bull (n.3)). --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Quindi "bullshit": eloquent and insincere rethoric... that smells. Per una trattazione più ampia si veda: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bullshit#Etymology [...] saluti, 380° [1] https://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/cazzata/ s. f. [der. di cazzo], volg. – 1. Sciocchezza, stupidaggine: dire, fare una cazzata. 2. Sgridata, rimprovero violento: mi ha fatto una c. che non finiva più. In questo sign., è da ritenersi un adattam. del napol. cazziata (der. di cazzià’ «sgridare, rimproverare»). [2] https://it.wiktionary.org/wiki/stronzata affermazione o azione insensata, falsa o scorretta [3] ...e Portoghese (falar merda), Spagnolo (hablar mierda), Francese... -- 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>.

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by Daniela Tafani

Molti altri - nessuno dei quali mi pare sia citato nell'articolo - hanno scritto di chatGPT come di un "bullshit generator", in senso tecnico, con riferimento a Frankfurt. Ad esempio, Dan McQuillan, https://www.danmcquillan.org/chatgpt.html Anche Richard Stallman usa spesso l'espressione: https://stallman.org/archives/2024-jan-apr.html Per quanto ne so (ma non ho indagato), il primo è stato Ezra Klein, nel 2023, intervistando Gary Marcus: ChatGPT and systems like it, what they’re going to do right now is they’re going to drive the cost of producing text and images and code and, soon enough, video and audio to basically zero. It’s all going to look and sound and read very, very convincing. That is what these systems are learning how to do. They are learning how to be convincing. They are learning how to sound and seem human. But they have no actual idea what they are saying or doing. It is bullshit. And I don’t mean bullshit as slang. I mean it in the classic philosophical definition by Harry Frankfurt. It is content that has no real relationship to the truth. [...] EZRA KLEIN: Let’s sit on that word truthful for a minute because it gets to, I think, my motivation in the conversation. I’ve been interested — I’m not an A.I. professional the way you are, but I’ve been interested for a long time. I’ve had Sam on the show, had Brian Christian on the show. And I was surprised by my mix of sort of wonder and revulsion when I started using ChatGPT because it is a very, very cool program. And in many ways, I find that its answers are much better than Google for a lot of what I would ask it. But I know enough about how it works to know that, as you were saying, truthfulness is not one of the dimensions of it. It’s synthesizing. It’s sort of copying. It’s pastiching. And I was trying to understand why I was so unnerved by it. And it got me thinking, have you ever read this great philosophy paper by Harry Frankfurt called “On Bullshit”? GARY MARCUS: I know the paper. EZRA KLEIN: So this is a — welcome to the podcast, everybody — this is a philosophy paper about what is bullshit. And he writes, quote, “The essence of bullshit is not that it is false but that it is phony. In order to appreciate this distinction, one must recognize that a fake or a phony need not be in any respect, apart from authenticity itself, inferior to the real thing. What is not genuine may not also be defective in some other way. It may be, after all, an exact copy. What is wrong with a counterfeit is not what it is like, but how it was made.” And his point is that what’s different between bullshit and a lie is that a lie knows what the truth is and has had to move in the other direction. He has this great line where he says that people telling the truth and people telling lies are playing the same game but on different teams. But bullshit just has no relationship, really, to the truth. And what unnerved me a bit about ChatGPT was the sense that we are going to drive the cost of bullshit to zero when we have not driven the cost of truthful or accurate or knowledge advancing information lower at all. And I’m curious how you see that concern. GARY MARCUS: It’s exactly right. These systems have no conception of truth. Sometimes they land on it and sometimes they don’t, but they’re all fundamentally bullshitting in the sense that they’re just saying stuff that other people have said and trying to maximize the probability of that. It’s just auto complete, and auto complete just gives you bullshit. And it is a very serious problem. I just wrote an essay called something like “The Jurassic Park Moment for A.I.” And that Jurassic Park moment is exactly that. It’s when the price of bullshit reaches zero and people who want to spread misinformation, either politically or maybe just to make a buck, start doing that so prolifically that we can’t tell the difference anymore in what we see between truth and bullshit. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/podcasts/transcript-ezra-klein-interview… ________________________________________ Da: nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> per conto di J.C. DE MARTIN <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it> Inviato: mercoledì 19 giugno 2024 10:51 A: Nexa Oggetto: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit" ChatGPT is bullshit Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 Abstract Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language models, is better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. Ethics Inf Technol 26, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 * Published 08 June 2024 * DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Una ricerca su un motore di ricerca, sul sito di una biblioteca o di una libreria online? On 19/06/24 12:02, Marco A. Calamari wrote: > On mer, 2024-06-19 at 11:34 +0200, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: >> Beh, il pamphlet di Harry Franfurt è stato tradotto in italiano col >> titolo: "Stronzate. Un saggio filosofico". > > Un link? > >> On 19/06/24 11:28, Franco Marra wrote: >> >>> Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo >>> "stronzate". A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al >>> traduttore Google. La risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... >>> >>> Il giorno mer 19 giu 2024 alle ore 10:51 J.C. DE MARTIN >>> <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it> ha scritto: >>> >>>> *ChatGPT is bullshit >>>> * >>>> Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 >>>> >>>> /Abstract >>>> /Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language >>>> models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text and >>>> dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by >>>> persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI >>>> hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall >>>> activity of large language models, is better understood as bullshit >>>> in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): >>>> the models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of >>>> their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be >>>> said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least >>>> one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI >>>> misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more >>>> accurate way of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these >>>> systems. >>>> >>>> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 >>>> >>>> Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. >>>> /Ethics Inf Technol/ *26*, 38 (2024). >>>> https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 >>>> >>>> * >>>> >>>> Published 08 June 2024 >>>> >>>> * >>>> >>>> DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 >>>> >>>> >> > >

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by Marco A. Calamari

On mer, 2024-06-19 at 11:34 +0200, J.C. DE MARTIN wrote: > Beh, il pamphlet di Harry Franfurt è stato tradotto in italiano col titolo: > "Stronzate. Un saggio filosofico". Un link? > On 19/06/24 11:28, Franco Marra wrote: > > > Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo "stronzate". > > A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al traduttore Google. La > > risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... > > > > Il giorno mer 19 giu 2024 alle ore 10:51 J.C. DE MARTIN > > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it> ha scritto: > > > > > ChatGPT is bullshit > > > > > > Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 > > > > > > Abstract > > > Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language models: > > > machine learning systems which produce human- like text and dialogue. > > > Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent inaccuracies > > > in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. We argue that > > > these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language models, is > > > better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On > > > Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent > > > to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models > > > can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least > > > one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI > > > misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way > > > of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems. > > > > > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > > > > > Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. Ethics Inf > > > Technol 26, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > > * Published 08 June 2024 > > > * DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > > >

June 19, 2024

R: "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by andrea＠surbone.it

Il libro di Graeber, Bullshit jobs, in italiano ha mantenuto il titolo originale ma nel testo è tradotto lavori di merda. Andrea Surbone +39 335 7226007 <http://www.surbone.it/> www.surbone.it <http://www.jussemper.org/> www.jussemper.org <http://www.propostaneokeynesiana.it/> www.propostaneokeynesiana.it D. Astrologo, A. Surbone, P. Terna Il lavoro e il valore al tempo dei robot - Intelligenza artificiale e non-occupazione Meltemi, Milano 2019 – con prefazione di Adam Smith <http://www.meltemieditore.it/catalogo/lavoro-valore-allepoca-dei-robot/> www.meltemieditore.it/catalogo/lavoro-valore-allepoca-dei-robot/ Da: nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> Per conto di J.C. DE MARTIN Inviato: mercoledì 19 giugno 2024 11:34 A: Franco Marra <marrafranco(a)gmail.com> Cc: Nexa <nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it> Oggetto: Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit" Beh, il pamphlet di Harry Franfurt è stato tradotto in italiano col titolo: "Stronzate. Un saggio filosofico". jc On 19/06/24 11:28, Franco Marra wrote: Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo "stronzate". A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al traduttore Google. La risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... Il giorno mer 19 giu 2024 alle ore 10:51 J.C. DE MARTIN <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it> > ha scritto: ChatGPT is bullshit Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 Abstract Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language models, is better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. Ethics Inf Technol 26, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 * Published 08 June 2024 * DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Beh, il pamphlet di Harry Franfurt è stato tradotto in italiano col titolo: "Stronzate. Un saggio filosofico". jc On 19/06/24 11:28, Franco Marra wrote: > Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo > "stronzate". A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al > traduttore Google. La risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... > > Il giorno mer 19 giu 2024 alle ore 10:51 J.C. DE MARTIN > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it> ha scritto: > > *ChatGPT is bullshit > * > Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 > > /Abstract > /Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language > models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text > and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by > persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called > “AI hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the > overall activity of large language models, is better understood as > bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, > Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent > to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which > the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they > clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue > that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more > useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the > behaviour of these systems. > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. > /Ethics Inf Technol/ *26*, 38 (2024). > https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > * > > Published 08 June 2024 > > * > > DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 >

June 19, 2024

Re: [nexa] "ChatGPT is bullshit"

by Franco Marra

Molto interessante, grazie. Io di solito per "bullshit" intendo "stronzate". A mo' di verifica ho chiesto di tradurre il termine al traduttore Google. La risposta è stata "cazzate". Se lo dice lui... Il giorno mer 19 giu 2024 alle ore 10:51 J.C. DE MARTIN < juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it> ha scritto: > > *ChatGPT is bullshit * > Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 > > > *Abstract *Recently, there has been considerable interest in large > language models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text > and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent > inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. > We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language > models, is better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt > (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way > indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which > the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet > at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI > misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way > of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems. > > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. *Ethics Inf > Technol* *26*, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > > - > > Published 08 June 2024 > - > > DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 > >

June 19, 2024

"ChatGPT is bullshit"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*ChatGPT is bullshit * Michael Townsen Hicks1 · James Humphries1 · Joe Slater1 /Abstract /Recently, there has been considerable interest in large language models: machine learning systems which produce human- like text and dialogue. Applications of these systems have been plagued by persistent inaccuracies in their output; these are often called “AI hallucinations”. We argue that these falsehoods, and the overall activity of large language models, is better understood as bullshit in the sense explored by Frankfurt (On Bullshit, Princeton, 2005): the models are in an important way indifferent to the truth of their outputs. We distinguish two ways in which the models can be said to be bullshitters, and argue that they clearly meet at least one of these definitions. We further argue that describing AI misrepresentations as bullshit is both a more useful and more accurate way of predicting and discussing the behaviour of these systems. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 Hicks, M.T., Humphries, J. & Slater, J. ChatGPT is bullshit. /Ethics Inf Technol/ *26*, 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 * Published 08 June 2024 * DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

June 19, 2024

MEMENTO | Convegno "Nuovi problemi e prospettive di sviluppo della proprietà intellettuale e del diritto della concorrenza a trent’anni dalla nascita della Rivista Il Diritto Industriale" | 20 giugno 2024

by Nexa - Media

Gentilissime, gentilissimi, Vi ricordiamo che giovedì 20 giugno, dalle ore 14.00 alle ore 19.00, si terrà il convegno intorno al tema “Nuovi problemi e prospettive di sviluppo della proprietà intellettuale e del diritto della concorrenza a trent’anni dalla nascita della Rivista Il Diritto Industriale”. Parteciperà alla discussione, tra gli altri, il Prof. Marco Ricolfi, co-direttore del Centro Nexa. L’evento si terrà IN PRESENZA presso la Sala Napoleonica dell’Università degli Studi di Milano (Via Sant’Antonio 12, Milano). Per maggiori dettagli è possibile consultare la pagina web dedicata: https://nexa.polito.it/diritto-industriale/ La partecipazione all’incontro è gratuita, previa prenotazione al seguente link<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUkmpWHB0M3wxqs6FMiSb6a71bB-_ulc1…>. Cordiali saluti, -- Valeria Bergantino Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino - DAUIN Via Pier Carlo Boggio, 65/A - 10138 Torino web: https://nexa.polito.it/ mail: valeria.bergantino(a)polito.it<mailto:valeria.bergantino@polito.it> tel: 3473443585

June 19, 2024