- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Paper: "New Frontiers of Philanthro-capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

*New Frontiers of Philanthro‐capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism* Ryan Burns First published: 15 April 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12534 Abstract Digital technologies that allow large numbers of laypeople to contribute to humanitarian action facilitate the deepening adoption and adaptation of private‐sector logics and rationalities in humanitarianism. This is increasingly taking place through philanthro‐capitalism, a process in which philanthropy and humanitarianism are made central to business models. Key to this transformation is the way private businesses find supporting “digital humanitarian” organisations such as Standby Task Force to be amenable to their capital accumulation imperatives. Private‐sector institutions channel feelings of closeness to aid recipients that digital humanitarian technologies enable, in order to legitimise their claims to “help” the recipients. This has ultimately led to humanitarian and state institutions re‐articulating capitalist logics in ways that reflect the new digital humanitarian avenues of entry. In this article, I characterise this process by drawing out three capitalist logics that humanitarian and state institutions re‐articulate in the context of digital humanitarianism, in an emergent form of philanthro‐capitalism. Specifically, I argue that branding, efficiency, and bottom lines take altered forms in this context, in part being de‐politicised as a necessary condition for their adoption. This de‐politicisation involves normalising these logics by framing social and political problems as technical in nature and thus both beyond critique and amenable to digital humanitarian “solutions”. I take this line of argumentation to then re‐politicise each of these logics and the capitalist relations that they entail.

1 0

"Who needs democracy when you have data?" (del 2018)
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

*Who needs democracy when you have data?** * /Here’s how China rules using data, AI, and internet surveillance.// / by Christina Larson Aug 20, 2018 In 1955, science fiction writer Isaac Asimov published a short story about an experiment in “electronic democracy,” in which a single citizen, selected to represent an entire population, responded to questions generated by a computer named Multivac. The machine took this data and calculated the results of an election that therefore never needed to happen. Asimov’s story was set in Bloomington, Indiana, but today an approximation of Multivac is being built in China. For any authoritarian regime, “there is a basic problem for the center of figuring out what’s going on at lower levels and across society,” says Deborah Seligsohn, a political scientist and China expert at Villanova University in Philadelphia. How do you effectively govern a country that’s home to one in five people on the planet, with an increasingly complex economy and society, if you don’t allow public debate, civil activism, and electoral feedback? How do you gather enough information to actually make decisions? And how does a government that doesn’t invite its citizens to participate still engender trust and bend public behavior without putting police on every doorstep? Hu Jintao, China’s leader from 2002 to 2012, had attempted to solve these problems by permitting a modest democratic thaw, allowing avenues for grievances to reach the ruling class. His successor, Xi Jinping, has reversed that trend. Instead, his strategy for understanding and responding to what is going on in a nation of 1.4 billion relies on a combination of surveillance, AI, and big data to monitor people’s lives and behavior in minute detail. [...] continua qui: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611815/who-needs-democracy-when-you-have…

1 0

"What Would More Democratic A.I. Look Like?"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

What Would More Democratic A.I. Look Like? /A new movement is pushing for A.I.’s future to be in the hands of the people/ Andrew Burgess <https://medium.com/@ajburgess> Something curious is happening in Finland. Though much of the global debate around artificial intelligence (A.I.) has become concerned with unaccountable, proprietary systems that could control our lives, the Finnish government has instead decided to embrace the opportunity by rolling out a nationwide educational campaign. Conceived in 2017, shortly after Finland’s A.I. strategy <http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/160391/TEMrap_47_…> was announced, the government wants to rebuild the country’s economy around the high-end opportunities of artificial intelligence, and has launched a national program <https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-one-percent-ai-artificial-intellige…> to train 1 percent of the population — that’s 55,000 people — in the basics of A.I. “We’ll never have so much money that we will be the leader of artificial intelligence,” said economic minister Mika Lintilä at the launch. “But how we use it — that’s something different.” Artificial intelligence can have many positive applications, from being trained to identify cancerous cells in biopsy screenings, predict weather patterns that can help farmers increase their crop yields, and improve traffic efficiency. But some believe that A.I. expertise is currently too concentrated in the hands of just a few companies with opaque business models, meaning resources are being diverted away <https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-01-07/tech-giants-gorging-o…> from projects that could be more socially, rather than commercially, beneficial. Finland’s approach of making A.I. accessible and understandable to its citizens is part of a broader movement of people who want to democratize the technology, putting utility and opportunity ahead of profit. [...] continua qui: https://medium.com/s/story/what-would-more-democratic-a-i-look-like-ea729f5…

1 0

10% of Americans don’t use the internet. Who are they?
by Giacomo Tesio April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/22/some-americans-dont-use-th… For instance, seniors are much more likely than younger adults to say they never go online. Although the share of non-internet users ages 65 and older has decreased by 7 percentage points since 2018, 27% still do not use the internet, compared with fewer than 10% of adults under the age of 65. Household income and education are also indicators of a person’s likelihood to be offline. Roughly three-in-ten adults with less than a high school education (29%) do not use the internet in 2019, compared with 35% in 2018. But that share falls as the level of educational attainment increases. Adults from households earning less than $30,000 a year are far more likely than the most affluent adults to not use the internet (18% vs. 2%). ____ Analisi interessante. Da affiancare a https://www.educationnews.org/technology/silicon-valley-tech-execs-sending-… Giacomo

1 0

The Spurious Justifications for Eliminating Price Caps on .org and Other Legacy Domains
by Giacomo Tesio April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.circleid.com/posts/20190423_spurious_justifications_for_elimina… ICANN is about to do serious damage to its reputation by making a precipitous, ill-considered leap into the unknown should it follow through on removing price constraints on several legacy extensions, most notably .org. Doing so would expose a global community of non-profits to the risk of quickly-escalating exploitative pricing. The rationale for eliminating price caps relies on three points, all of which are incorrect — 1) that the registries for the legacy gTLDs should be treated the same as the new gTLD registries, that is as owners entitled to capture the entire value of the name spaces, 2) that price competition will restrain prices, and 3) that it is not ICANN's role to set and to regulate prices.

1 1

After the Bust, Are Bitcoins More Like Tulip Mania or the Internet?
by Giacomo Tesio April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

Scusate, aggiungo in oggetto il titolo dell'articolo. Giacomo On 24/04/2019, Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> wrote: > Articolo interessante: sebbene cerchi diplomaticamente di non prendere > posizione sottolinea alcune delle criticità più evidenti dei software > basati sulla blockchain senza portare un singolo argomento a favore > della tecnologia. > Anche se non tratta gli enormi problemi teorici e tecnici, è più serio > di tanti altri. > > > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/technology/bitcoin-tulip-mania-internet.… > > When you talk to tech industry insiders about where Bitcoin is > heading, two vastly different comparisons are inevitable: the tulip > bulb and the internet. > > Bitcoin’s critics say the digital tokens are like the tulip bulbs of > 17th-century Holland. They generated a wild, speculative rush that > quickly disappeared, leaving behind nothing but pretty flowers and > wrecked bank accounts. > > Bitcoin believers, on the other hand, want us to think about > cryptocurrencies as if they were the internet: a broad technology > category that took some time to reach its potential, even though > expectations got ahead of reality in the early years. If that’s true, > last year’s crash in Bitcoin prices was like the dot-com bust; a > temporary setback before the big ideas come to fruition. [...] > > Speculative transactions accounted for roughly 60 to 80 percent of all > transactions on the blockchain, according to Chainalysis, a start-up > that does analysis of the blockchain for big companies and > governments. Most of those transactions are Bitcoins moving between > cryptocurrency exchanges around the world. [...] > > Many if not most Bitcoin advocates I’ve encountered will admit it > doesn’t offer much of an improvement over traditional electronic > methods of payment. In several ways, it’s worse. Paying with Bitcoin > requires you to become a speculator on its volatile price for the time > you are holding on to tokens and waiting to pay. [...] > > The bigger problem facing Bitcoin is that the practical and legal uses > have struggled to outpace illegal or clearly unethical activity. > > The list of ways that Bitcoin has proved useful to criminals keeps > growing, from the ransom payments on locked-up computer files — or > even hostages — to illegal drug sales. [...] > > Many venture capitalists have made bets on Ethereum and EOS, > alternative cryptocurrency networks that can be programmed for more > sophisticated applications, like financial contracts, than Bitcoin’s > software allows. [...] > > But a majority of these Dapps still focus on legal gray zones, like > gambling. The most prominent use of Ethereum so far has been by > companies, many of them scams and frauds, that wanted to raise money > without complying with securities regulations, through so-called > initial coin offerings. > > I have seen little indication that any of the more legitimate uses > have worked easily enough to have any appeal beyond cryptocurrency > fanatics. [...] > > The latest big cryptocurrency player is Facebook, which is said to be > working on its own digital tokens. So are several other big messaging > companies. >

1 0

(no subject)
by Giacomo Tesio April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

Articolo interessante: sebbene cerchi diplomaticamente di non prendere posizione sottolinea alcune delle criticità più evidenti dei software basati sulla blockchain senza portare un singolo argomento a favore della tecnologia. Anche se non tratta gli enormi problemi teorici e tecnici, è più serio di tanti altri. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/technology/bitcoin-tulip-mania-internet.… When you talk to tech industry insiders about where Bitcoin is heading, two vastly different comparisons are inevitable: the tulip bulb and the internet. Bitcoin’s critics say the digital tokens are like the tulip bulbs of 17th-century Holland. They generated a wild, speculative rush that quickly disappeared, leaving behind nothing but pretty flowers and wrecked bank accounts. Bitcoin believers, on the other hand, want us to think about cryptocurrencies as if they were the internet: a broad technology category that took some time to reach its potential, even though expectations got ahead of reality in the early years. If that’s true, last year’s crash in Bitcoin prices was like the dot-com bust; a temporary setback before the big ideas come to fruition. [...] Speculative transactions accounted for roughly 60 to 80 percent of all transactions on the blockchain, according to Chainalysis, a start-up that does analysis of the blockchain for big companies and governments. Most of those transactions are Bitcoins moving between cryptocurrency exchanges around the world. [...] Many if not most Bitcoin advocates I’ve encountered will admit it doesn’t offer much of an improvement over traditional electronic methods of payment. In several ways, it’s worse. Paying with Bitcoin requires you to become a speculator on its volatile price for the time you are holding on to tokens and waiting to pay. [...] The bigger problem facing Bitcoin is that the practical and legal uses have struggled to outpace illegal or clearly unethical activity. The list of ways that Bitcoin has proved useful to criminals keeps growing, from the ransom payments on locked-up computer files — or even hostages — to illegal drug sales. [...] Many venture capitalists have made bets on Ethereum and EOS, alternative cryptocurrency networks that can be programmed for more sophisticated applications, like financial contracts, than Bitcoin’s software allows. [...] But a majority of these Dapps still focus on legal gray zones, like gambling. The most prominent use of Ethereum so far has been by companies, many of them scams and frauds, that wanted to raise money without complying with securities regulations, through so-called initial coin offerings. I have seen little indication that any of the more legitimate uses have worked easily enough to have any appeal beyond cryptocurrency fanatics. [...] The latest big cryptocurrency player is Facebook, which is said to be working on its own digital tokens. So are several other big messaging companies.

1 0

How to hide from the AI surveillance state with a color printout - MIT Technology Review
by Antonio Vetro' April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.technologyreview.com/f/613409/how-to-hide-from-the-ai-surveilla… av

1 0

Why the huge growth in AI spells a big opportunity for transdisciplinary researchers
by Antonio Vetro' April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01251-1 "[…] current events around digital technology, along with debates about biased algorithms and ethical and regulatory challenges of autonomous systems, underscore the fact that AI is more than a technology of the future. It is impacting today’s sociopolitical climate. More importantly, current events and debates highlight the fact that AI management is more of a social and political issue than an engineering challenge. " Tendenzialmente mi trovo d’accordo con l’autore, pur senza sminuire le sfide tecnologiche. antonio v.

1 0

«Google e Amazon? Vi spiego come l’Antitrust Ue regola i big di internet» - Corriere.it
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 24, 2019

April 24, 2019

https://www.corriere.it/economia/aziende/19_aprile_19/google-amazoncosi-tut… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

9 18