- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Studi sulla formazione: Vol 23, No 2 (2020): Anno XXIII, 2-2020
by don Luca Peyron July 5, 2021

July 5, 2021

Segnalo il numero della rivista in oggetto, ad accesso libero, con diversi contributi interessanti sulla DAD in tempo di pandemia e con uno sguardo verso il dopo. Buona lettura dl https://oajournals.fupress.net/index.php/sf/issue/view/523 _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

1 0

"Neurons Act Not As Simple Logic Gates, But As Complex, Multi-Unit Processing Systems"
by J.C. DE MARTIN July 3, 2021

July 3, 2021

Di inizio 2020, ma a me finora ignoto. jc *Neurons Act Not As Simple Logic Gates, But As Complex, Multi-Unit Processing Systems* Jan 23, 2020 by William Brown, Resonance Science Research Scientist A study published in the journal Science has upended 80 years of conventional wisdom in computational neuroscience that has modeled the neuron as a simple point-like node in a system, integrating signals and passing them along. This neuron-as-integrator model, also known as the “dumb” neuron model, has severely restricted the conception of what a neuron is capable of doing, and hence how neuronal networks and the brain as a whole functions. This has not only impeded the development of a complete understanding of neuronal activity in the higher brain regions of the cortex, but it has also adversely affected computer science, significantly limiting the development of neuromorphic computational networks because they have been based on an incomplete model. Empirical investigations are now suggesting that scientists re-evaluate neuronal information processing as a much more complex system—one that may not have direct parallels with our computational technologies. [...] continua qui: https://www.resonancescience.org/blog/Neurons-Act-Not-As-Simple-Logic-Gates…

2 1

Quella fantasia che l'intelligenza artificiale non potrà avere mai
by don Luca Peyron July 3, 2021

July 3, 2021

I modelli linguistici utilizzati dalle macchine sono troppo rigidi rispetto alle infinite combinazioni possibili del reale. Il cervello invece le reinventa di continuo perché sa anticiparle. Buona lettura dl https://www.avvenire.it/agora/pagine/intelligenza-artificiale-e-linguaggio-… _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

1 0

Fired by Bot at Amazon: 'It's You Against the Machine'
by Enrico Nardelli July 2, 2021

July 2, 2021

Online retailing giant Amazon's Flex contract drivers say their jobs are at the mercy of software that can unfairly rate their performance. Algorithms mine data on performance patterns and assign drivers routes, or deactivate them, with little human feedback. One source says the Flex algorithms do not account for human nature, setting up good drivers for failure. A former engineer who helped design Flex says Amazon believes the program's benefits offset the collateral damage; a former manager says the company knew the software would lead to errors and bad press, but felt addressing such issues was unnecessarily expensive, as long as drivers could easily be replaced. Full article: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-06-28/fired-by-bot-amazon-turn… *Full Article <https://orange.hosting.lsoft.com/trk/click?ref=znwrbbrs9_6-2bad7x32c185x071…> * -- EN ===================================================================== Prof. Enrico Nardelli Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli(a)mat.uniroma2.it home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ ===================================================================== --

5 5

Herbert Lin - Cyber Risk Across the U.S. Nuclear Enterprise
by Diego.Latella July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

Buongiorno Si tratta certamente di uno degli articoli piu' chiari che mi sia mai capitato di leggere sul nesso cyber-nuclear. Tutti i concetti esposti possono essere compresi facilmente anche _senza_ possedere competenze/conoscenze specifiche ne' su questioni miliatri/nucleari, ne' su questioni cyber/informatiche.Per di piu', alcune considerazioni fatte per esempio sulla transizione _legacy --> modernized-systems_ si possono, a mio avviso, applicare a _qualunque_ sistema digitale. Ne suggerisco vivamente la lettura! https://tnsr.org/2021/06/cyber-risk-across-the-u-s-nuclear-enterprise/ 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 =================== 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

2 1

The future of Android App Bundles is here
by Giacomo Tesio July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

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

2 1

Conspiracy: in Theory and Practice — Edward Snowden
by Giacomo Tesio June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

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

2 1

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 June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

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

1 0

La cybersecurity
by don Luca Peyron June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

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

1 0

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 June 29, 2021

June 29, 2021

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

1 0