@lennart
A very human reaction. đ
Posts in English
@m
> How do we know it isn't an AI that is doing the debunking? Mmm? Mmm?
I was hoping someone would make that point, as I thought it as well when writing đ
This could be true, in which case we are already screwed. But if I concede to that being true my existence (and self-awareness) becomes largely irrelevant. So I can just keep playing the game to keep feeling some sort of sense of autonomy. According to the wishes of the AI harvesting me for energy. đ„Ž
> On a more serious note [âŠ]
Agree. We can no longer trust much by way of future content. Small networks of people will become very important. Time to get my ham radio licenseâŠ
Trustworthiness of stories has always been iffy, but a big change is that those with the most money and power can control the âtruthâ by their ability to flood our feeds with content.
Fia skriver sĂ„ bra oerhört bra (och underhĂ„llande!) om vad âeffektivisering via digitaliseringâ egentligen kan innebĂ€ra för vĂ„rden ur olika perspektiv.
Styrkor och svagheter i dessa rapporter (och pamfletten) radas upp pÄ ett tydligt sÀtt och bör vara obligatorisk lÀsning för alla som arbetar med digitalisering i offentlig sektor. McKinseys gamla rapport frÄn 2016 fÄr sig ocksÄ en kÀnga.
«Det Àr alltsÄ svÄrt att avgöra vad digitaliseringen egentligen leder till och var vinster uppstÄr. Som alla som Àgnat sig Ät att studera sjukvÄrden sÄ Àr behovet oÀndligt: om en bot skapas uppstÄr hela tiden nya och alltmer förfinade behov. Och det Àr i princip omöjligt att avvisa lösningar som leder till bot eller lindring och eftersom nya medicinska rön hela tiden tas fram sÄ mÄste beslut om prioriteringar stÀndigt förnyas. Vad som Àr "kostnadseffektivt" i denna vÄldsamt rörliga mÄlbild gÄr inte att avgöra och att minska kostnader för vÄrden Àr Ànnu mer avlÀgset.»
Förutom innehĂ„llet njöt jag oerhört av den oavsiktliga(?) tvetydigheten i âbot och lindringâ. Och jag skrattade högt Ă„t raden: âDĂ€refter grips författaren av nĂ„got som kallas insiktâ.
@uastronomer
That is disheartening.
@arush
Saw many toots and posts the other day referencing the drone that killed its human operator. In a simulation.
That story has since been debunked. It was not a simulation, it was just a thought experiment. So a purely fictional story.
But Iâm already seeing people reference the story in writing and in talks. The story is just too good and people love the element of shock.
A good reminder of how fake stories proliferate, and the debunking of those stories do not.
I also feel most media did a terrible job of reporting on this.
https://www.inkl.com/a/lbXWXjijEpm
@chendricks
Thank you Christina. đ
@dinkompismia @m
Helt fast i detta tĂ€nk nu. đŹ KĂ€nner att jag vill lĂ€sa en bok om hur sekter skapas. MĂ„nga paralleller att dra kĂ€nns det som. LĂ€gger till denna till sommarens lista nu.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealot:_A_Book_About_Cults
Och lyssning pÄ hennes podd⊠https://pca.st/Juct
@dinkompismia Ha, exakt!
@dinkompismia
Ăven âhehetsbildâ mĂ„ste förstĂ„s ifrĂ„gasĂ€ttas. SĂ„ mĂ„nga felaktiga förestĂ€llningar i allt detta. Inte minst sjĂ€lva begreppet AIâŠ
Jag förstÄr att mÀnniskor inte har tid att sÀtta sig in i detta, men att sÄ mÄnga Àr villiga att acceptera magiskt tÀnkande Àr frustrerande. Jag lÀgger viss skuld pÄ den övergripande kÀnslan av hopplöshet som förmedlas av makthavare. Och decennier av science-fiction filmer. Kanske Àr det skapandet av en ny religion vi bevittnar.
@dinkompismia
Det Ă€r nog det dĂ€r som skrĂ€mmer mig mest. Att sĂ„ mĂ„nga tror att maskinerna pĂ„ nĂ„got sĂ€tt Ă€r fristĂ„ende frĂ„n mĂ€nniskor. Att âbĂ€stâ ens kan vara en gemensam sanningâŠ
@dinkompismia Ja jag blir mer och mer intresserad av att kartlÀgga alla vÀrderingar, förmÄgor och relationer vi vÀljer att ge upp eller ersÀtta.
While a misleading narrative of doom is being widely pushed, I want to contribute to bringing attention to the real harms and risks of AI. And I do this, honestly, with an intent to show how the harms are tangible and can be addressed.
This is a good thing.
If we can be open and honest about the actual risks then we stand a better chance of owning them and acting to evade or mitigate them. If we don't talk about them, our chances of managing them responsibly are zero.
All the harms are human-made and hence are under human control. What we need to do is demand more transparency around each issue, and acknowledge how all teams that deploy or make use of AI need a mitigation strategy for many different types of harms.
I give you The Elements of AI Ethics, which borrows from and builds on my chart from 2021, The Elements of Digital Ethics.
Read about it here and download the chart in PDF format for your own, free, use: https://axbom.com/aielements/
Let me know what you think.
#AIEthics #DigitalEthics
While a misleading narrative of doom is being widely pushed, I want to contribute to bringing attention to the real harms and risks of AI. And I do this, honestly, with an intent to show how the harms are tangible and can be addressed.
This is a good thing.
If we can be open and honest about the actual risks then we stand a better chance of owning them and acting to evade or mitigate them. If we don't talk about them, our chances of managing them responsibly are zero.
All the harms are human-made and hence are under human control. What we need to do is demand more transparency around each issue, and acknowledge how all teams that deploy or make use of AI need a mitigation strategy for many different types of harms.
I give you The Elements of AI Ethics, which borrows from and builds on my chart from 2021, The Elements of Digital Ethics.
Read about it here and download the chart in PDF format for your own, free, use: https://axbom.com/aielements/
Let me know what you think.
#AIEthics #DigitalEthics
I have developed this communication model as a guide for conversations and strategic work aimed at improving AI tools. Note that the focus here is on human interaction with the tool. It is about the components that affect input data (from the human) and output data (from the computer), and by extension how a human chooses to act based on the output data.
The diagram contributes a communication science perspective to better understand when, where and how in the use and application of these AI tools that one can make an effort to improve for example
* comprehensibility,
* satisfaction and
* benefit.
It is useful in implementation planning, design decisions, communicative efforts and training. I've provided a complete walkthrough of all components.
And you are free to use it in your work (PDF download in the post).
https://axbom.com/aicom/
#DigitalEthics #AIEthics #UXDesign #CommunicationModel
I have developed this communication model as a guide for conversations and strategic work aimed at improving AI tools. Note that the focus here is on human interaction with the tool. It is about the components that affect input data (from the human) and output data (from the computer), and by extension how a human chooses to act based on the output data.
The diagram contributes a communication science perspective to better understand when, where and how in the use and application of these AI tools that one can make an effort to improve for example
* comprehensibility,
* satisfaction and
* benefit.
It is useful in implementation planning, design decisions, communicative efforts and training. I've provided a complete walkthrough of all components.
And you are free to use it in your work (PDF download in the post).
#DigitalEthics #AIEthics #UXDesign #CommunicationModel
Idag pratar jag gĂ€rna omâŠ
* fenomenet att ha en "dum" mobil
* tillit och varför det Àr sÄ viktigt i digitala tjÀnster
* och kanske lite om desinformation och deepfakeâŠ
Men egentligen Àr jag mer intresserad av vad du vill prata om. Dyk in i ljud-mötet (ingen bild, inget spelas in) och dela med dig av dina reflektioner. Eller bara lyssna.
Som radio. Fast bĂ€ttre. đ
Altman to the senate two weeks ago: AI needs regulation and you should let me decide what that means!
Altman to the EU last week: Calling our tool âhigh-riskâ is too harsh. We may have to pull out of the EU.
Altman by way of a statement he just signed: These tools are an existential risk on par with pandemics and nuclear war!
Attention-seeking, much?
Meanwhile, itâs an accelerator for harm that is already happening. And volatility is clearly a trait he shares with his tool.
I've updated my Speaking and Teaching pages. Upon returning from #UXLx, meeting some stellar people and getting truly energized I realised it's time to get better at showcasing my own workshops and talks again. I still feel like I disappeared into a very foggy existence for three... (four?) years and have struggled to emerge again... like so many of us obviously.
On the plus side I just got two bookings sorted for November so that's super fun. Which is kinda how I realised I need to do more of this thing that I truly enjoy so very much⊠teaching.
So if you're running education programmes, conferences or events for the public or for your own teams, now might be a good time to consider my topics on getting inspired, ahead and more knowledgeable about digital design for improved wellbeing.
And will I cover AI? Why yes... yes I will.
To get a feel for the workshops and talks I'm running at the moment, these are the two pages to browse. All workshops can be structured as half-day, full-day, multi-day or custom-made for your organisation. They are of course set up to work well both on location and online.
1) Speaking: https://axbom.com/speaking
2) Teaching: https://axbom.com/teaching
#DigitalEthics #AIEthics
â ïž LinkedIn behavior ("link in comments")
People adding links to what they want to share in their comments rather than in the main post is a great example of humans adapting to machines rather than using machines to support human wellbeing.
Saying "the link is in the comments" and then adding links in the comments section make them more difficult to find for people with visual and cognitive impairments. Heck, they're more difficult for anyone to find once there are many comments on the post.
Yet this is the behavior that the design of LinkedIn encourages, and that many choose to act on. Because there is a strong belief that LinkedIn penalises posts with links to external sources, as showcased by a few studies.
The "visibility and click"-yearning becomes more important to appease than any yearning to cater to various accessibility needs. And yes, this is by design.
Sidenote: Some of my most viewed and shared posts on LinkedIn have had the link in the main post. I'm not even sure the widespread belief is a concrete truth.
@kolombiken Thank you! So glad you enjoy them. đ
And completely understand about the time it may take to read. đ