Basically I am interested in the intersection between politics and the internet in the context of this list, which is broader than the NN issue. So I appreciate monday conversation starters like these.
In my case, I often have to revert to thinking about the present in terms of what used to be science fiction. "Interface" - upon cogitating about what the coming election will look like came to mind - https://www.amazon.com/Interface-Stephen-Bury/dp/0553572407 When I first saw the deepfakes Pr0n phenomenon a few years ago, I had my oh-ghu moment, as I realized once tools like that got into everyone's hands the truth and authenticity of any form of media begin to vanish, and the recent rise of the LLMs *almost* put the finish to it. Thankfully the LLMs (so far) have a terrible tendency to hallucinate which is often easily detectable, and overall, the technoliterati have managed to expel really bad ideas like crypto-grift, web3, and so on in the last few years. Web3 investment is down 70% this year... I now wish very much that the concept of "whuffie" existed in the real world, but the flight to mastodon, twitter's addition of community notes, most of newspapers moving to a for-pay model, and in general, the innoculation of the populace at large to distrust everything they learn on line is well underway which I find some comfort in. Promoting widespread skepticism and disbelief are powerful tools, but trying to find guidelines to what is actually truthful harder. For example, I read wikipedia's talk page on everything controversial. Too few do that. I recently sat through fox news with my mom, because her blood pressure was too low, and it served well to "improve" that, and me, take a lisinopril. Life's just a ride, tho, you know? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_Kingdom On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:32 AM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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. > Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair & Distinguished Fellow > Henry S. Stimson Center, Business Executives for National Security > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain -- 40 years of net history, a couple songs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos _______________________________________________ Nnagain mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
