From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B20283CB38 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 19:18:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) by bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B4F9D1B258; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 16:18:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bobcat.rjmcmahon.com B4F9D1B258 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rjmcmahon.com; s=bobcat; t=1704413927; bh=7HT3J07R3xtWtE4rHIz1T2QVpkKH2OnQKZ1bPhqB/UM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qusO7Humo+f/eawrQJqvdJsPiWNUX37mM7JwPhYVdHBYWjs2kzPk3FKJKhv2W4R1A xqG3FVAk8lHu+IXlAWZCh8/MlSpksaNjx4JR5Wg7RmJW6grt3WsKB+7EWAmvCmg5rJ DKw1MOuqAW+fqbpeaVjaa0rFQSL0hYvyhVbBNN2A= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 16:18:47 -0800 From: rjmcmahon To: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_a?= =?UTF-8?Q?spects_heard_this_time!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <720aeb8379a81c5467500b65277bcc82@rjmcmahon.com> X-Sender: rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authentic vs. inauthentic information and identity X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 00:18:48 -0000 Hmm, this seems non trivial. The epistemology that I try to use is based on the scientific method but I also use a lot of belief that others follow this method too. Also, with the current trends in AI, it seems to me we're mostly creating ant mills vs knowledge and discovery. https://youtu.be/LEKwQxO4EZU?feature=shared I asked ChatGPT if it behaved like an ant mill. It responded no. I then asked it to compare itself with and ant mill and basically said it behaved exactly like an ant mill. Then I asked it some questions about Elon Musk and it always prefaced everything with, "Elon is a God." I stopped using it after that. No knowledge to be found. Bob > Dear NNAgain’ers, > > Today on a different listserv, I joined a discussion on what I sense > will be a pressing issue across multiple sectors in 2024. I recognize > this is not NN-related and so if it isn’t of interest, I apologize > in advance. However as most of us have technology background here, my > sense is we generally have a better sense of the looming issue than > non-technical folks at the moment. Below I outline some of the > contours of the evolving problem space, and invite each of you to > share your thoughts as I sense the diversity of perspectives here > might help with brainstorming potential solutions necessary for civil > societies to continue: > > Premise: We are at the precipice of an extended era where > inauthenticity vs. authenticity will be difficult to discern, that > that involves multiple forms of content including biometrics and more. > > > In isolated pockets, governments are becoming aware of this - however > it’s going to be really difficult for pluralistic societies like the > U.S. where any of the Estates that traditionally would have a role to > play in verifying the authentic vs. inauthentic nature of something > have had public trust in them as arbiters eroding. And it doesn’t > help that both politics and advertisement rely on presenting things as > 100% authentic when they’re often only somewhat so (or, to be more > generous, mix facts with lots of beliefs). > > Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bit of a “home > field” advantage here because there is only one singular narrative - > and anyone who questions it can be fired/isolated, > imprisoned/disappeared, or killed/executed. Tools of such regimes, to > include filtering, censorship, and repression - will be used to ensure > only one narrative (authentic or not, mostly likely the latter) is > seen by a majority of their population. Pluralistic societies will > have it much harder, and the last ten years will pale in comparison to > the challenges of sensemaking in a world flooded by both media and > mediums of questionable authenticity. > > Back in 2019-2020, I did my darnest to connect Pablo and an additional > People-Centered Internet expert with Salesforce that has a lot of CRM > data with the proposal that SF could provide a feature where, as part > of the CRM, “out of band” questions could be included to do some > sort of additional level of trust that the entity on the other end was > who they claimed to be. Unfortunately that pitch was overshadowed by > larger concerns that SF’s software, give some of its features, could > be misused in ways not intended by them (think about ways akin to > Cambridge Analytica) and they were trying to figure out how they could > incorporate features to prevent actors from misusing/abusing their > software in ways not intended by them as a company. > > 2024 is going to be hard. Manipulation of what people appear to see, > hear, sense - and thus know - is becoming sadly easier. > > Meanwhile understanding of the importance of triangulation, > triangulation, triangulation from different perspective to discern > authenticity vs. inauthenticity remains time-consuming and hard. > Perhaps we need to consider standing up private sector Dun & > Bradstreet-like entities for identity and other important adjudicatory > functions - however that doesn’t immediately solve the issue of how > to help the public in a would experiencing a flood of questionable > content, information, and identities? And who “watches” the > adjudicators? > > David Bray, PhD Principal, LeadDoAdapt Ventures, Inc. [1] > > Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair [2] & Distinguished Fellow > Henry S. Stimson Center [3], Business Executives for National Security > [4] > > Links: > ------ > [1] https://www.leaddoadapt.com/ > [2] https://napawash.org/fellow/305629 > [3] https://www.stimson.org/ppl/david-bray/ > [4] https://bens.org/people/dr-david-bray/ > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain