Could Robots Develop Prejudice on Their Own? | Acumen

Because it is a strategy that can be learned by merely identifying and copying the behavior of another agent, the adoption of prejudicial attitudes is not a decision that requires very sophisticated cognitive abilities. This may not be all that surprising: Prejudice is not something that many of us consider the mark of sophistication. But the implications of this are nonetheless jarring. The more possible it is for prejudice to develop independently of humanity’s distinct social and psychological capabilities, the more conceivable it becomes that future forms of AI that involve some level of autonomy and interaction with other machines, including the internet of things and self-driving vehicles, could be susceptible to developing the same types of biases that we see among humans.Does this mean that we can expect racist or sexist AI robots shaping our lives in the near future? In some ways, this is already happening. Remember Tay, the AI-powered Twitter chatbot that Microsoft had to take offline shortly after its debut once it started rattling off a bunch of racist sentiments it had learned from interacting with other Twitter users? Whitaker cautions that AI robots developing their own damaging set of prejudices would likely be a very long way into the future. And the study’s findings also point to some factors that can help limit the effects of prejudice, including the diversity of interactions between simulated agents, diverse types of agents and being able to learn from a wider range of population members. In other words, societies in which in-group diversity is present and that value global learning from interactions with out-group populations are the best equipped to stem the proliferation of prejudice.Still, it’s hard not to worry about a future in which prejudicial robots go rogue. And what happens if the “outsiders” that they are prejudiced against turn out to be us?

By | 2018-12-13T12:55:41+00:00 December 13th, 2018||0 Comments

Keith Weed on his biggest success: We proved the business case for sustainability

Weed thinks Unilever’s decision to promote a marketer to CEO is a “brilliant” move and he is a big fan of incoming boss Alan Jope.“I’ve known Alan for 33 years – both of us cut our teeth in the US in the early 1990s when it was the place to learn how to be a great marketer. From that day, not only has he been a good friend but he’s also shown himself as a great marketer.”Weed is wary of speaking about the future of Unilever: “I really don’t want to speculate on the future because that’s not up to me.”However, Weed, who will leave the company at the beginning of May next year, will work with Jope when he starts in January. Weed describes his successor as “very much Alan’s call” but says he has already “shared his thoughts” on the future of the role and what a marketing leader needs to succeed.I do believe miserable people deliver miserable results and you want to have great results.Keith Weed, Unilever“You need to be curious about people’s lives, curious about what works and what doesn’t work. Marketing leaders should value curiosity, understanding of consumers and consumer trends, and also ensure they are bringing the outside in and really driving growth.”He adds: “If you have to get to the future first you need to have a view of where the future is.”Whether FMCG can still get to the future first is up for some debate. Many in the industry have questioned whether FMCG is still the breeding ground for marketers it once was amid mounting challenges from digital disruptors and direct-to-consumer brands that are seen as closer to their consumers.

By | 2018-12-13T12:49:32+00:00 December 13th, 2018||0 Comments

The Co-Opting of French Unrest to Spread Disinformation

In the weeks since the gilets jaunes movement took off, Ryan Fox, COO of New Knowledge, a cybersecurity company that tracks Russian-related influence operations on Twitter, has noticed a network of accounts that his organization believes is connected to Russia shift its focus to France. Since October 28, these 340 accounts have created and amplified content about the brutality of the French police, Macron’s inability to lead the nation, and anti-NATO or anti-migrant sentiments more than 20,000 times, according to New Knowledge. Among the claims: Macron’s treatment of the gilets jaunes is worse than Bashar al-Assad’s treatment of Syrian rebels.Roughly two weeks after they had first mentioned #GiletsJaunes in late October, the network of accounts was responsible for at least 1,600 protest-related mentions per day on Twitter, with daily tallies growing even larger in late November and early December. The allegedly Russian accounts primarily retweeted misinformation about the protests, rather than create it themselves.Fox says that although there is no way to know for sure who is behind a particular influence network on a social media platform like Twitter, the accounts in question have a history of operating in concert with one another to amplify narratives being pushed by the Kremlin or that are aligned with Russia’s geopolitical goals. According to New Knowledge, the two most popular links shared by the network of accounts were articles published by the the French arm of Russian government-owned news agency Sputnik News. The third-most-popular link promoted by the network came from RT-France, which is also funded by the Russian government.“The goal is to destabilize—to undermine the ability of these Western countries to successfully govern,” Fox told WIRED, noting similarities between the campaign in France and the Russian influence operations on Facebook and Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election.French security officials opened a probe into possible Russian interference on social media over the weekend, reports Bloomberg. In a radio interview with RTL, French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said an investigation was underway, but offered no specifics on the status or scope. Regardless, disinformation targeting the gilets jaunes continues to spread relatively unchecked for now, as tensions grow in France.Twitter says it removes tweets linked to any coordinated attempt to deceive.

By | 2018-12-13T12:49:11+00:00 December 13th, 2018||0 Comments

Google Glass Wasn’t a Failure. It Raised Crucial Concerns

The main critique of Google Glass wasn’t really that they looked stupid (although, to be clear, they did). People were kicked out of bars for wearing Glass because the device represented a form of ubiquitous recording. Glass was outfitted with a camera that the user could activate at any time, and this, rightfully, freaked people out. The New York Times ran a front-page story about Glass, wondering whether it would mean the end of privacy as we know it. A group cheekily named Stop the Cyborgs pushed against Glass "to stop a future in which privacy is impossible and central control total." Even the bar in Seattle that briefly became famous for banning Glass did so in part because of a existing policy that forbid patrons from taking videos or photos without consent. (And because doing so would get them media attention and perhaps some new customers.)So when Google ultimately retired Glass, it was in reaction to an important act of line drawing. It was an admission of defeat not by design, but by culture.These kinds of skirmishes on the front lines of surveillance might seem inconsequential — but they can not only change the behavior of tech giants like Google, they can also change how we’re protected under the law. Each time we invite another device into our lives, we open up a legal conversation over how that device's capabilities change our right to privacy. To understand why, we have to get wonky for a bit, but it’s worth it, I promise.

By | 2018-12-13T12:48:59+00:00 December 13th, 2018||0 Comments

ICOs Use Sponsored Reviews to Attract Investors

Larry Cermak, head of analysis at The Block, said he is concerned that sponsored reviews delivered by self-purported cryptocurrency gurus are driving new investors to make poor decisions. “The main reason why so many inexperienced individuals invest in bad crypto projects is because they listen to advice from a so-called expert,” he complained. Many unskilled investors “believe they can take this advice at face value even though it is often fraudulent, intentionally misleading or conflicted.”In a recent interview with Reuters, Hacken’s Budorin said that sponsored video reviews should feature tags identifying them as such. He added that the company’s decision to pay for positive reviews was “unethical.”Tim Glaus, co-founder of Swiss cryptocurrency ratings company Alethena, said the company has been approached by several individuals offering to arrange paid-for ratings from Icobench experts. Maxim Sharatsky, the chief executive officer of Icobench, acknowledged that the platform has accidentally published reviews that were sponsored by ICO issuers.“We have more than 16,000 ratings on our platform. Unfortunately, we have (had) accidents with sales (of) ratings, and it’s very bad. It’s a problem for me, for our platform and for all interested,” Sharatsky said.

By | 2018-12-10T10:43:39+00:00 December 10th, 2018||0 Comments

USDT Trade Volume Up Despite Tether’s Stablecoin Dominance Dropping

On Oct. 14, one day before Tether’s dramatic decoupling from its dollar-peg, tether was the eighth largest market cap with a circulating supply of 2.66 billion USDT and a 24-hour volume of $2.02 billion.The second largest stablecoin, trueusd, was then the 48th largest crypto by capitalization with a circulating supply of 135.3 million TUSD and a 24-hour volume of $11.75 million.Dai comprised the 97th largest crypto with an outstanding supply of 60.8 million DAI and a 24-hour volume of $4.2 million, and paxos ranked 176th by market cap with a supply of 23.75 million PAX and a 24-hour volume of $21.3 million.Data indicating the circulating supply of Circle’s USDC as of Oct. 14 could not be found, however, Coinmarketcap recorded USDC as having a market cap of approximately $24 million and 24-hour volume of roughly $1.2 million on Oct. 17.USDT Supply Falls 30% in Two WeeksOn Oct. 28, roughly two weeks after USDT crashed to $0.88, tether still boasted the eighth largest market cap but the circulating supply of USDT had fallen by approximately 30 percent, with a 24-hour trade volume of $1.68 billion.Meanwhile, the supply of trueusd had grown 30 percent to 175.45 million to rank as the 45th largest cryptocurrency by market cap, with $26.4 million worth of TUSD changing hands during the preceding 24 hours.The supply of USDC had grown nearly 420 percent to rank it as the 58th largest crypto with 124.2 million outstanding tokens, but 24-hour volume had fallen to $642,196. Paxos had grown 305 percent to rank as the 69th largest capitalization with a supply of 96.1 million and a 24-hour volume of $24.8 million. The supply of dai had grown 9 percent to 66.5 million despite dai slipping one place to rank as the 98th largest crypto asset and 24-hour volume falling to $3.3 million.

By | 2018-12-10T10:42:36+00:00 December 10th, 2018||0 Comments

The killer questions to ask before beginning a digital transformation

There are four areas all businesses should before embarking on a digital transformation journeyWhat is your role in people’s lives?What is your business really in the business of? Are you a car maker or a mobility provider? Are you a credit card or a membership club like Amex? Are you a computer company or a maker of experiences? Why do banks really exist today and in the future? What can you do to provide more meaning and relevance in people’s lives?2. Map out new consumer behaviours and expectationsIf we can see an Uber’s location in real time, we don’t accept a four-hour window for a repair person. If we’ve never waited online to pay for items, we won’t accept queues in-store. If we can text our contents insurance provider, we find it out of place when our bank makes us fax something. Technology changes our behaviours and expectations across all categories, we have to work to what people expect, not to what we can most easily achieve.3. Consider regulations and the grey areasBanking is known to be hard to innovate in because of firm rules and regulations, but where are the spaces to exploit? WeChat Pay can store users’ money and pay interest but is somehow not a bank. From payment systems like TransferWise to communal loans from Kiva, many disruptive services seem to explore the grey areas of rules and regulation.4. Build a new solution around new techBased on a firm understanding of the role, the consumer expectations and legal framework, what new technology can you layer in to produce game-changing results? What happens when loans are collateralised or approved based on social media profiles and reputations? What happens if mortgages and land deeds are built on the blockchain? How can facial recognition and a smile rather than a signature act as the approval mechanism?Not every industry in the world is going to change fast but waves of change are coming from mobile devices, new security protocols, new business models and companies that exploit the new and lax regulation. Banking is set for more change than most, so what would you rather do? Make the smallest changes you need to do to stay relevant, cut costs and hope for the best, or understand what’s coming, invest in the latest thinking and technology and propel yourself into the future?

By | 2018-12-10T10:41:06+00:00 December 10th, 2018||0 Comments

Le Canada et la France donnent le coup d’envoi d’un « GIEC » de l’intelligence artificielle

Emmanuel Macron  l'avait appelé de ses voeux , Justin Trudeau l'a annoncé officiellement ce jeudi : un groupe d'expert international va être constitué dans les prochains mois pour étudier les impacts de l'intelligence artificielle (IA). L'initiative a été lancée à Montréal, à l'occasion d'une conférence du G7 intitulée « permettre l'adoption responsable de l'IA ».Dans son intervention, le Premier ministre canadien a annoncé que « la France et le Canada se sont entendus pour mettre sur pied un groupe international d'experts sur l'intelligence artificielle qui réunira des représentants de la communauté scientifique, de l'industrie, des gouvernements et de la société civile. »Le G2IA (Groupe international d'experts en intelligence artificielle), ou en anglais IPAI (International Panel on artificial intelligence) s'inspire ouvertement du GIEC (Groupe d'experts intergouvernemental sur l'évolution du climat), créé en novembre 1988 à partir d'une initiative du G7 pour réunir des spécialistes de tous horizons et de tous pays. L'idée d'un « GIEC » de l'IA en avait été évoquée pour la première fois par Emmanuel Macron en mars 2018, lors du sommet organisé à Paris  pour la remise du rapport du mathématicien et député Cédric Villani .Le but du G2IA « sera de mieux comprendre les enjeux liés à l'intelligence artificielle et de définir les meilleures pratiques », a précisé Justin Trudeau, en indiquant que la France et le Canada allaient inviter les autres membres du G7, mais aussi de l'OCDE et de l'ONU, « à se joindre à nous et à nous aider à élaborer un cadre qui deviendra le point de référence mondial en intelligence artificielle. »Cette annonce intervient alors que la France doit prendre début 2019 la succession du Canada à la présidence du G7,  dans un contexte marqué par la défiance de Donald Trump envers les institutions multilatérales. Elle permet au Canada de passer le flambeau à la France en mettant en avant un thème de plus en plus présent dans l'actualité, qui présente de nombreux enjeux éthiques, économiques et sociétaux.Une grande conférence à l'été 2019Présent à la réunion du G7, le secrétaire d'Etat chargé du numérique, Mounir Mahjoubi, a annoncé que ce groupe d'experts serait ouvert « à tous les pays qui partagent l'idée d'un modèle d'IA qui ne soit ni uniquement au service du profit, ni uniquement au service du contrôle, mais qui soit aussi au service du développement humain et de la planète. »

By | 2018-12-07T22:21:45+00:00 December 7th, 2018||0 Comments

UP Magazine – Gilets jaunes : la pensée dispersée façon puzzle

Perturbations référentiellesL’absence de structuration du mouvement comme de référence historique perturbe les philosophes. Ce mouvement ne ressemble à rien. Ce n’est pas Mai 68 revisité quarante ans après. Cynthia Fleury rappelle fort justement que « Mai 68 c’était essentiellement une révolution autour de la liberté contre l’autorité. Aujourd’hui c’est une insurrection contre l’inégalité. » Le sociologue Michel Wieviorka observe que ce mouvement « ne ressemble en rien à Mai 68, et pas davantage à la grève de 1995, et ses acteurs n’en parlent pas. Il n’est en aucune façon révolutionnaire, au sens où il ne vise pas à prendre le pouvoir d’État. » A quel autre modèle historique rattacher les Gilets jaunes ? Le sociologue Alexis Spire, qui vient de publier aux Éditions du Seuil, Résistances à l’impôt, attachement à l’État, tente de chercher une parenté avec les jacqueries « dans le sens où elles étaient des explosions populaires qui rassemblaient dans les campagnes bien au-delà des seuls travailleurs agricoles et qui n’avaient pas de représentant mandaté ni de vision cohérente de l’émancipation. » Autre point commun des jacqueries avec le mouvement actuel, « elles étaient dirigées contre la noblesse qui était vue comme une caste sourde aux difficultés rencontrées par le peuple. » Mais il ajoute aussitôt que la comparaison doit être nuancée : « L’Ancien Régime était le règne de l’arbitraire et les inégalités fiscales étaient criantes. Les jacqueries partaient à l’assaut des châteaux en s’alliant parfois aux bourgeois des villes. Elles s’accompagnaient d’une grande violence de la part des insurgés mais aussi dans la répression qui en découlait. » Nous n’en sommes pas (encore) tout à fait là.  Certains cherchent à voir dans les Gilets jaunes des réminiscences du poujadisme. On y retrouve le même discours anti-élites, qu’elles soient politiques ou économiques. Alexis Spire souligne : « Le thème des petits contre les gros est un fil rouge des mobilisations contre l’impôt mais ça ne suffit pourtant pas à en faire un énième mouvement poujadiste, car ce n’est pas la même morphologie sociale. ». Objet complexe non analyséSans comparaison historique pertinente, le mouvement des Gilets jaunes est un objet complexe qui semble échapper à l’analyse. Marcel Gauchet s’en inquiète car il constate bien plus qu’une fracture sociale, une véritable « dislocation sociale ». Écoutons-le : « On est encore plus loin dans le morcellement de la société. Entre des blocs, c’est ce que montre ce mouvement, qui n’ont même plus de langage commun. On ne se comprend plus. Et pour une société politique et démocratique, c’est ce qu’il y a de plus grave. » Il précise sa pensée en expliquant que cette « France des fins de mois difficiles », elle vient de très loin. « Et comme toujours, dit-il, ce qui est imprévisible, c’est le moment où il y a un retournement de la situation sous forme de protestation. On subit, on subit, et puis un jour ça explose. Il n’existe pas de sismographe de ce genre de phénomène. »Selon lui, la fracture n’est plus seulement sociale, elle est devenue morale. « On a perdu le langage commun. ‟Vous ne savez pas ce que nous vivons″ versus ‟vous ne comprenez pas la mondialisation″. Voilà l’échange auquel nous assistons. C’est évidemment sans issue. »  Cynthia Fleury observe aussi ce dialogue de sourds : « Il y a dans les Gilets jaunes tous ceux qui sont délaissés, oubliés, qui travaillent, qui ne sont pas des assistés ou des profiteurs, qui ne sont pas les plus pauvres mais qui n’arrivent pas à joindre les deux bouts. C’est cette France-là, cette majorité silencieuse qui s’est tue jusqu’à présent qui aujourd’hui se met ensemble. » Ce mouvement spontané, décrit ainsi, pourrait déboucher sur des solutions, des discussions, des accords et peut-être de réels progrès. Or au contraire, il inquiète la philosophe. En effet, la grande caractéristique des Gilets jaunes semble une entrée dans le ressentiment. « Et c’est considérablement inflammable. Le ressentiment n’a jamais constitué une conscience de classe commune, un dialogue. » Il faut entendre ce ressentiment. Bernard-Henri Lévy exhorte les politiques ; il ne faut surtout pas dire « Cachez ce peuple que je ne saurais voir » ou « virez-moi ces Gilets jaunes qui ne sentent pas bon le diesel ». La société serait suicidaire si elle restait sourde. Les politiques pourraient voir dans cette éruption sociale une chance de réinventer le politique et la citoyenneté. Dans le cas contraire, tous les philosophes s’accordent à dire que tout peut arriver, même l’enfantement de monstres. Quand la pensée est démunie, il faut panserComment comprendre, comment entendre ce désespoir que forge une immense régression accablant des millions de gens ? Bernard Stiegler, dans son dernier livre estime que « la pensée, sous toutes ses formes est absolument démunie ».  Elle arrive trop tard. En revanche, il n’est jamais trop tard, selon lui, pour panser. « Et si la pensée est démunie c’est parce qu’elle a cessé de penser comme soin, comme panser. »La mauvaise humeur, la colère, la rage, la violence, le ressentiment sont, chacun à leur mesure, les divers symptômes d’une maladie engendrée par une technosphère exorbitée et exorbitante. Une technosphère mondialisée qui a laissé les humains dans un parfait dénuement thérapeutique. S’accumulent alors les bombes à retardement et autres charges explosives résultant de cette incapacité de penser. Une des façons de « panser » serait de veiller à humaniser les réponses. À remettre de l’humain au cœur de toutes les décisions politiques. À ne pas fuir le réel ni poursuivre des ombres ou des totems dogmatiques. Sera-ce encore suffisant aujourd’hui ?

By | 2018-12-05T13:21:30+00:00 December 5th, 2018||0 Comments

Who’s Using P2P Payments in the US?

Like other burgeoning technologies, the increase in P2P payment usage is mainly being driven by millennials.“Younger consumers are willing to engage with platforms they feel they can trust, but that also allows them to engage in ways that are consistent with how they normally operate in their lives,” said Juan Benitez, general manager of the PayPal-owned Braintree, in our "Mobile Proximity and Peer-to-Peer Payments 2018" report.What's more, an April 2018 study by Early Warning Services found that nearly half (49%) of millennial smartphone owners in the US—which the study defined as 22- to- 37-year-olds—have sent or received money at least once a week. In contrast, 42% of 38- to-53-year-olds have made payments at least weekly, and nearly a third (32%) of those 54 to 72 have.Who's Dominating the Space?Fewer millennials may be saying "I'll Venmo you" in the next few years.While Venmo was likely the first P2P service to draw in this demographic, and historically it has held the majority of market share, we expect Zelle will overtake Venmo in 2018.Zelle will grow more than 73% this year to reach 27.4 million users in the US, slightly ahead of Venmo (22.9 million users). Square Cash will round out the top three with 9.5 million users.

By | 2018-12-05T13:10:44+00:00 December 5th, 2018||0 Comments