Security
tips.
How
Location Tracking Works on Your Phone in 2020
gizmodo:
“How phones track location is changing – if you’ve upgraded to
the latest Android 10 or iOS 13 updates, you may have noticed more
prompts around what apps can do with data about your whereabouts.
Here’s what those new prompts mean, and how you can get your
phone’s location tracking settings set up in a way that you’re
comfortable with…”
How
to kill a technology? Except for Big Brother, of course.
Automated
facial recognition breaches GDPR, says EU digital chief
Commissioner
Margrethe Vestager believes facial recognition in the EU requires
consent
… Margrethe
Vestager, the European
Commission’s executive vice president for digital affairs, told
reporters that “as it stands right now, GDPR would say ‘don’t
use it’, because you
cannot get consent,”
EURACTIV
revealed today.
GDPR
classes information
on a person’s facial features as biometric data, which is labeled
as “sensitive personal data.” The use of such data is highly
restricted, and typically requires consent from the subject —
unless the processing meets a range of exceptional circumstances.
These
exemptions include it being necessary for public security. This has
led the UK’s data regulator to allow police to use
facial recognition CCTV, as it met
“the threshold of strict necessity for law enforcement purposes.”
Did
an AI write this article? Would a contract granting me ownership of
the patent in exchange for an uninterruptible supply of electricity
solve this? My AI thinks it would.
Why
AI systems should be recognized as inventors
The
Artificial Inventor Project is exposing the limitations of existing
patent laws
Existing
intellectual property laws don’t allow AI systems to be recognized
as inventors, which threatens the integrity of the patent system and
the potential to develop life-changing innovations.
Current
legislation only allows humans to be recognized as inventors, which
could make AI-generated
innovations unpatentable. This would deprive the owners of
the AI of the legal protections they need for the inventions that
their systems create.
The
Artificial
Inventor Project team
has been testing the limitations of these rules by filing patent
applications that designate a machine as the inventor— the first
time that an AI’s role as an inventor had ever been disclosed in a
patent application. They made the applications on behalf
of Dr
Stephen Thaler,
the creator of a system called DABUS, which was listed as the
inventor of a food container that robots can easily grasp and a
flashing warning light designed to attract attention during
emergencies.
The
European
Patent Office (EPO) and
the United
Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) both
rejected the application, on the grounds that the inventor designated
in the application had to be a human being — and not a machine.
Slowly
correcting the journal model.
https://www.bespacific.com/open-access-journals-get-a-boost-from-librarian-much-to-elseviers-dismay/
Open
access journals get a boost from librarian much to Elsevier’s
dismay
ars
technica:
“A quiet revolution is sweeping the $20 billion academic
publishing market and its main operator Elsevier, partly driven by an
unlikely group of rebels: cash-strapped librarians. When Florida
State University cancelled its “big deal” contract for all
Elsevier’s 2,500 journals last March to save money, the publisher
warned it would backfire and cost the library $1 million extra in
pay-per-view fees. But even to the surprise of Gale Etschmaier, dean
of FSU’s library, the charges after eight months were actually less
than $20,000. “Elsevier has not come back to us about ‘the big
deal’,” she said, noting it had made up a quarter of her content
budget before the terms were changed. Mutinous librarians such as
Ms. Etschmaier remain in a minority but are one of a host of
pressures bearing down on the subscription business of Elsevier, the
140-year-old publisher that produces titles including the world’s
oldest medical journal, The Lancet. The company is facing a profound
shift in the way it does business, as customers reject traditional
charging structures. Open access publishing—the move to break down
paywalls and make scientific research free to read—is upending the
funding model for journals, at the behest of regulators and some big
research funders, while online tools and the illicit Russian
pirate-site Sci-Hub are taking readers…”
As
a huge fan of SciFi, I refuse this definition. Think of it more as
hypothesis testing.
Fan
of sci-fi? Psychologists have you in their sights
Science
fiction has struggled to achieve the same credibility as highbrow
literature. In 2019, the celebrated author Ian McEwan dismissed
science fiction as
the stuff of “anti-gravity boots” rather than “human dilemmas”.
According to McEwan, his own book about intelligent robots, Machines
Like Me, provided the latter by examining the ethics of artificial
life – as if this were not a staple of science fiction from Isaac
Asimov’s robot stories of
the 1940s and 1950s to TV series such as Humans (2015-2018).
Psychology
has often supported this dismissal of the genre. The most recent
psychological accusation against science fiction is the “great
fantasy migration hypothesis”.
This supposes that the real world of unemployment and debt is too
disappointing for a generation of entitled narcissists. They
consequently migrate to a land of make-believe where they can live
out their grandiose fantasies.
Free
Learning tool?
Socratic,
the homework-helper app picked up by Google, gets an AI-enhanced
Android release
Back
in 2017, Socratic
was launched on Android,
offering students assistance with their homework. The app was pretty
interesting,
and managed to catch Google's eye, leading to an acquisition. Last
year we got word that an updated version of the app was about to
debut, with a heavy emphasis on tapping into Google's AI algorithms
to improve performance. Now that new Android edition is finally
available to download.
No comments:
Post a Comment