RE:RE:RE:RE:GEC Report on Russian Disinformation Great write up...I couldn't do a better job. Thanks for your detailed analysis. Yes, I have been following Bill C-20 and I am very concerned about what the government is asking. This incrementalism approach of diluting the Canadian Bill of Rights is dangerous and the use of AI by the government to achieve these goals is bothersome to me...personally.
shaker13 wrote: Respectfully Torlif , I disagree
IMHO , Maxdude raises a fair & important point, that was even raised by Adam Johnson in his podcast interview with Marshall, and that's surrounding the ethical use of AI and should we be fearful.
In some cases such as the Patriot Act I can say I agree in some respects that over reach by governments can occur and there is a strong need to keep governments in check with non-governmental oversight bodies.
Checks and balances so to speak.
A perfect current example here in Canada, that I have spoken about here previously is current legislation proposed to be passed by the sitting government is Bill C-10, which many view as a censorship of online media about what content can or cannot be put online by individuals, many view as overreaching control and a direct assault on free speech and a contravention of the Canadian Bill of Rights.
So as in with the subject matter of the ethical use of AI, another form of oversight and keeping the pendulum of fairness in the middle where it belongs, as in a case such as Bill C-10 for example, beyond opposition parties, non-governmental panels and oversight committees, there is the power of one.
That is , your individual ability and right in a democratic society to cry foul, raise your concerns by using social media to share your thoughts to perhaps, idevelop consensus amongst your friends if they agree with whatever threat you happen to perceive to citizens civil liberties, thereby starting a call to action for citizens to sign petitions, call their members of parliament.
This is another form of oversight, and in my view the most important form of oversight, beyond our courts and justices.
Free Speech is enshrined in the Bill of Rights and the Bill of Rights is not a list of things the government gave us, it is a list of things the government cannot ever take away from us.
My argument here, in my opinion, is non-political and that Bill C-10 is not only about the government attempting to overstep their mandate, but even more so a question about the ethical use of AI, because if the government is successful at getting Bill C-10 passed, we shareholders of DM know more then most that it will be algorithms that decide what content a individual's is allowed or not allowed to be posted online, and if fines or jail time can be allocated where deemed violations occur.
The government already has monitoring & discovery tools available to them through companies like DM.
Because we all agreed to this monitoring when we signed up to these social media sites, that should be enough for Intel bodies to search for potential threats and as Adam Johnson mentioned and asked Marshall when he said , AI is all around us already and we don't even know it , and it is rapidly becoming ubiquitous in our society
, that's when Adam said, that's good for your business, but is it scary for us.
I like Marshall's response when he made the Tool analogy and like the invention of Fire, which mostly created disruption in a fantastic way, it could also be loaded onto the top of a spear and used to burn dwellings down.
That the same analogy second amendment advocates use , I think fairly.
Anyways if we were shareholders of a Pharma company that makes and sells drugs, it in my view would be fair to for shareholders in a bullboard to discuss the safety efficacy and ethical use of those drugs as much as it is reasonable here to discuss DM's ethical development of their AI Tools and how they condone their clients deployment of our tools.
Realizing how as Torlif fairly points out, our adversaries are using these AI tools in sophisticated ways against us like creating mass disinformation & fake news and disseminating it online through Bots in a attempt to disrupt our democracies , and as long as this activity exists there will be the need for the Defence Tools DM builds.
Thats why personally as a shareholder, I was really like when Marshall said he doesn't think we should be fearful of AI because it's nothing more then a tool and everytime society creates a tool that is far reaching like AI that has the potential to be misused by bad actors, humanity finds a way of developing safeguards and regulating against those misuses.
Of course having said that, as I once heard Steve Jobs say, our ability to innovate outweighs our ability to regulate, and there will be instances where we as a society are faced with having to play catch up , so when Marshall pointed out the threat is not the tool, it's the people using it, and AI will be a great boon to society as long as humanity is ethical with each other, I was particularly impressed when Adam asked if Marshall had a code of conduct, and he said there is definitely boundaries for DM and that he would not permit the company to be involved in any projects that would use their tools to hurt people or segregate society.
I hope that would include things like Bill C-10
Anyways I think that covers my reply to Maxdude & then some:-)
Im not suggesting how people here should react to Bill C-10, just trying to advocate for raising awareness and let folks make their own decisions.