Author Archive

« Older Entries

Facts – Who Needs Them?

Wednesday, January 8th, 2025

Is this the end of social media we witness? I hate to say “late capitalism,” but does anyone have a better label? Having observed how Musk effectively killed Twitter/X by killing content moderation and moving to “community notes,” Zuckerberg thought it would be great to try the same recipe for his platforms. What is that definition of madness again? “Repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome” …something like that? Can somebody please explain how Facebook, Threads, Instagram, et al will not drown in the cesspool of AI, trolls, spam, and slop the same way that X did?

Ah, well, who uses Facebook these days anyway? It was already swimming in irrelevant content, and only your grandmother posts there anymore. Time to start looking for Facebook’s Bluesky?

It is ironic in a way, those who used to advocate for no regulation of platforms liked to say that competition will take care of it. Looks like they had a point, except it was not some new competitor that brought them down. They did it to themselves (sort of like constitutional democracy in some countries, some might add).

It does not end with a bang nor a whimper, but a slow, painful, ugly decline into desperation. AI propaganda, alt-right nonsense, Russian disinformation, fake news, hate speech… good luck monetizing that, mr Zuckerberg. I hope you have a profitable car company to cross-subsidize your losses…

I have often pondered why Silicon Valley has failed to develop standards and self-regulation to benefit its users, owners, advertisers, workers, etc, as most industries like to do, instead rather inviting policymakers to regulate them. At one point I had the opportunity to ask an insider just this, and they told me there had been attempts, but there was so much backstabbing between the companies that it never materialised. I guess we’ll see about the backstabbing now.

Oh, by the way, this change is only US for now. EU citizens: relax. Your online platform experience is completely safe…

Do users want stupid political discussions on their social media anyway? In the early days, somebody described Facebook as a cocktail party. You can pop in to all kinds of interesting conversations, but nobody talks about politics. Ah, the good old days… Turns out cocktail parties work best when there is a host that… you know… asks misbehavers to leave.

“The reality is this is a tradeoff,” Zuckerberg says in the video. “It means that we’re going to catch less bad stuff, but we’ll also reduce the number of innocent people’s posts and accounts that we accidentally take down.”

Happy New Year, trolls!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Blog | No Comments »

All Hail Our Robot Overlords

Monday, October 21st, 2024

Ray Kurzweil’s new book The Singularity Is Nearer brings back some familiar topics; review here by Ralf Grötker. One is the dualism of mind and body—in Christianity, our soul leaves the body and we can live forever in heaven (unless, of course, we have sinned; in that case, we have another thing coming). For Kurzweil, we can upload our minds to the cloud and live forever (regardless of our sins!). But… your body interacts with your mind, no? And you might want to interact with the outside world? Don’t worry, all those things can be simulated.

When prophecies fail, some prophets re-write them and delay the rapture, apocalypse or singularity. Kurzweil does the opposite—he brings it closer. It used to be 2045, but in the (appropriately named!) new book, the new delivery date is 2040. This is the year when you can start backing up your mind to the cloud. Subject to change, one would suppose, but mark your calendar just in case.

Will this opportunity be equally available. Certainly not, but don’t worry—even if your income has not increased in the last two decades, you are still much richer today. At least measured in computing cycles, which in Kutzweil’s world is the only really important currency. You get much more computing power today for the same money! It makes sense if your demand is computing. And all the rest can be simulated anyway, so put your money where your… eh, computer cycles are.

This phenomenon is known as Moore’s law—you know those lines about how a doorbell has more computing power these days than the Apollo rocket? That is Moore’s law: the observation that the amount of transistors on an integrated circuit chip doubles on average every two years. Or double computing power at same price every two years. Or half price for same computing power. You get it. Silicon Valley may treat this as a law of nature, but Wikipedia puts it as an observation, a projection, and an “experience”curve”—continued improvement based on growing experience. (Or “Wright’s law”, for those who like laws).

Will it last forever? Maybe, but there are some question marks. The economies of scale in chip production require increasingly large production facilities. There are limits to energy access. Microchips cannot be infinitely small; the electronic circuits require some nanometers to let the electrons pass; as those circuits become smaller, they become increasingly difficult to produce (waste increases). And so on. This is the logic of diminishing returns. Sure, with fusion energy and quantum computing, those things will be fixed. But those technologies are far beyond 2040. An old Greek philosopher has said that better than I could ever hope to. (If you click that blogpost, it will take you back to 2013 but the thinking has not evolved!)

But maybe more importantly: you have more computer cycles, but can you do more with them? The word processing software I use for writing this blog has not changed fundamentally since those I first came across 30+ years ago. Sure it looks better, has more fonts and (very annoying) spell-check. But all these are incremental developments. They don’t add up to a revolution. They don’t bring us closer to eternity (unless, of course, you write an immortal masterpiece).

Now you must choose your path, padawan. You can trust Kurzweil and prepare for bliss and immortality in the cloud, where lions and lambs live peacefully together. Or you can choose the bold path and challenge the concept. But before you move that way, let me warn you of Roko’s Basilisk. If you try to delay the arrival of the almighty artificial intelligence, it might punish you for it. And if you should depart meatspace before the singularity comes, the AI may still bring back a simulation of you. And torture it. In eternity.

All hail our robot overlords!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Blog | No Comments »

Want to become a brain in the cloud?

Thursday, October 17th, 2024

Kurzweil’s “Singularity” is a future where Google will infiltrate our brain matter and veins

Companies like Google literally infiltrate our brains and veins, merging human intelligence with the cloud

We should take this seriously. The Singularity is Nearer is a book that offers a glimpse into how human life, according to popular future predictions, could become something that can be stored in the cloud. And of course, technology does not exist without commercial service providers. While it doesn’t say so explicitly, Kurzweil’s new book envisions a future where companies like Google literally infiltrate our brains and veins. Disclosure: Ray Kurzweil is not just a respected futurist and engineer but also holds a leadership position at Google.

The Singularity is Nearer The Singularity is Nearer – Ray Kurzweil serves as an update to Kurzweil’s previous book, The Singularity is Near, published nearly twenty years ago. As the author proudly notes, it’s not a revision of his earlier predictions but a confirmation. (For a list of his forecasts across different works, see Wikipedia.) The central theme is the merging of machine intelligence with humans, culminating in a point (the “singularity”) where machine intelligence surpasses the combined power of all human brains. The timing of this new book is well chosen, given the public release of ChatGPT and its competitors over the last two years, which have likely surprised many of us with the capabilities of artificial intelligence.

Nanobots: A Path to Enhanced Intelligence and Immortality

The concept, in a nutshell: computing power continues to get cheaper and cheaper. “One dollar today buys about 11,200 times as much computing power, adjusted for inflation, as it did in 2005.” And this trend will continue. Soon, it will be feasible for computers to surpass the human brain in sheer computational capacity. This will allow them to function as extensions of our own brains. The extension will take the form of a direct connection between our neocortex and the cloud. (Note: this assumes that human intellectual activity can be reduced to the processes occurring in the neocortex.) The connection will be established almost non-invasively, through microscopic devices called nanobots, which will be introduced into the brain via the capillaries. Once inside, they will communicate directly with simulated neurons hosted in the cloud. This, according to Kurzweil, will mark a new step in evolution. “In the past, we added roughly one cubic inch of brain matter every 100,000 years, but with digital computation, we are doubling price-performance every sixteen months.”

Digital Replication and Ending Ageing

By 2040, Kurzweil believes, we will be ‘able to back up our mind files digitally

Becoming smarter—much smarter—is just one step in Kurzweil’s vision. The other, even more astounding achievement he predicts is immortality. Immortality will come in two forms. The first is the “replicant”: a digital version of a person who has died, re-enacted by machines. This concept goes far beyond the AI-generated avatars we see today. By 2040, Kurzweil believes, we will be “able to back up our mind files digitally.” The brain’s information will be preserved digitally, and Kurzweil claims this information is not just a collection of data but the essence of a person’s identity. As replicants, people will continue to exist even after death in the biological sense.

The second form focuses on ending ageing. Kurzweil predicts that by 2030, medical nanobots will be able to “conduct cellular-level maintenance and repair throughout the body.” Cancer will be eradicated, as these nanobots will “examine each individual cell and determine whether it is cancerous or not, and then destroy all the malignant ones.” DNA transcription errors, a major cause of ageing, will be prevented and even reversed. While this may seem far off, Kurzweil claims that by 2030, “the most diligent and informed people will reach ‘longevity escape velocity’—a tipping point at which we can add more than a year to our remaining life expectance for each calendar year that passes.”. (To anyone who wonders what “diligent and informed” stands for: Kurzweil himself is said to take 100 pills a day in an effort to “reprogram” his biochemistry.) What Supplements does Ray Kurzweil take and why? — TRANSCEND

Philosophical and Ethical Questions: Unanswered in the Singularity

All of this sounds fantastic, and it raises many technological and philosophical questions. Kurzweil does address some of these in his book, such as the debate over artificial consciousness. However, he leaves other issues, like the role of emotions or relationships in human identity, untouched. What also goes unexamined are the questions of corporate power and control. If our minds and bodies fuse with information technology, they will fuse with technology providers such as Google. That this might be perceived as scary, does not seem to be worth a line throughout the book.

Does Rising Technology Lift All Boats?

Kurzweil also deals with the macro-economic outlook at great length. Climate change and ecological problems are solved as minor issues on the way.  One obvious point of criticism might be that only the wealthy will profit from superbrain-power and longevity. Kurzweil doesn’t think so. Almost half of the book is devoted to show how “exponentially improving information technology is a rising tide that lifts all the boats of the human condition”. Kurzweil and his at least sixteen co-authors (who are listed as members of the “Kurzweil team” in the acknowledgement pages) have spared no effort to pile up statistical evidence of how, globally, technological progress has made possible a better life, especially for the least well-off.

While stagnant wages in developed countries are a real issue, Kurzweil points out that “even if your normal wages stayed flat over the past two decades, you can now buy many thousands of times more computing power with them”. Therefore, he concludes, you are richer in a sense.

Thus, a horizon of expectation is set. Against that horizon, other things are getting ever more expensive: those things and services which cannot be produced ever more efficiently. Labour-intensive services like health care, teaching and the like become less and less affordable for individual consumers and to society. Economists describe this phenomenon as “cost disease”. Kurzweil’s age of the singularity will be a future where old-style teaching and health care will be a luxury accessible only for very wealthy people.

A Reality Check: Technology vs. Infrastructure in 2024

One last observation: when I started reading the book, I was on a train from Berlin to Munich. The train—or rather, the journey, since I had to change trains unexpectedly—was several hours late due to a series of technical and managerial problems. This is the usual state of long-distance travel with German Railways these days. Decades of underinvestment in infrastructure, combined with staffing shortages, have led to frequent system breakdowns. This is the reality in 2024. From this perspective, technological progress seems like something that happens only in books.

Kurzweil offers an answer to this too. “Wars and other political problems make large infrastructure projects impractical.” As a result, centralized technological fixes aren’t always the solution. The alternative is technologies that empower individuals to solve problems themselves (his example: water purification). The private solution for long-distance travel, by this logic, is cars or airplanes. But what we have today is congestion, pollution, and urban spaces dominated by cars. It’s not a solution, and many cities are trying to change this. The “singularity” doesn’t appear to have an answer for these kinds of problems.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Books | No Comments »

TESCREAL or How to Tell if Your Broligarch Is after Your Soul (or just Your Data)

Monday, September 2nd, 2024

What has gone wrong with the minds of Silicon Valley? In the 1970s the place was full of hippies who saw computers as a counter-culture. In the 1990s information wanted to be free. In the 2010s the internet was claimed to topple dictators. And now? Now Silicon Valley is run by broligarchs – tech bros who want to control elections, control the media, control the markets. (And in some cases puppets for bigger forces.) Much has been said about Big Tech’s ideological U-turn, but Netopia wants to offer three observations: early signs, religion and… sand. Bear with me:

Early signs. Let’s take a look at the arch-broligarch, tech investor Peter Thiel. He laid out the plan almost forty years ago as the co-founder and editor-in-chief of student newspaper Stanford Review when he articulated the manifesto for Silicon Valley’s dominance: 1. No regulation 2. No taxes. 3. No copyright. 4. No competition. It is fair to say that the plan worked. The same Thiel suggested datacenters be set up on abandoned oil rigs on international water in order to escape government intervention (Barbara Broccoli, if you read this put this in the next 007 flick!). In his 2014 book From Zero to One, Thiel advocates niche monopolies as business strategy (no competition!). And perhaps those oil rigs aren’t necessary after all, if you pull the strings of policy-makers like puppets. None of this should come as a surprise though, the signs were there all along.

Religion. Worship higher powers, separate soul from body and be blessed with eternal life. Sound familiar? They simply replaced the word God with AI and look what happened. If you want to know if a broligarch is after your soul or just your money, look for the word TESCREAL for example on their Twitter/X-profile. (Or check if they are a member of a community such as this!) Tescr… what? Let’s decipher it:

T – Transhumanism. Transcend the limits of the physical body and live forever through technology. Stop infection with microbots in your bloodstream. Replace worn-out organs with synthetic ones. Add new sensory functions like night vision. None of these technologies exist yet? Fear naught, there is a company that offers to cryo-freeze your corpse until the tools and methods have been properly developed.

E – Extropianism. An earlier label for the transhumanism idea. A scoop on Truthdig revealed that this also included ideas of superior intelligence in the white race (by Oxford AI professor Nick Bostrom no less).

S – Singularitarianism. The idea that the accelerating pace of innovation will come to a point – The Singularity – when all innovation happens at the same time. Moore’s law which predicts increases in computing power is one ingredient. The speed of dissemination of new technologies (soundbites like “television took four decades, smartphones four years and Chat-GPT four days” are par for the course) is another. Expotential growth is another key word. When the singularity comes, technology will liberate us, we will live forever and shall not want. Google chief technologist Ray Kurzweil expects the singularity in the year 2045, though his more recent forecasts suggest it may have been delayed slightly. Oh, there is also the Singularity University in Santa Clara, CA, (right next to Google’s Mountain View) where students can study this concept.

C – Cosmism. Humans will merge with technology and become a new race, for example by uploading our minds online and live forever without bodies. Same Kurzweil has a new book out about this (review coming soon on this website). And of course William Gibson described this idea long ago in Neuromancer (Ace, 1984) where “cyber-cowboy” McCoy Pauley’s consciousness uploaded to ROM-drive plays a central part. (Re-read the book!)

R is for Rationalism. For all this good stuff to happen, we need really smart people working on the execution. The TESCREAL-flavour of rationalism is about finding ways to make people smarter so the fantasy can become reality. An obsession with IQ-tests is part of the package.

EA is for Effective Altruism. Don’t waste your time saving the world at some not-for-profit, instead make heaps of money on something evil and donate to something good. How about crypto currency scams and donations to one of those NGOs (or Singularity University!)?

L – last but not least: Longtermism. A moral compass that says if human kind can live forever uploaded to the cloud or on new planets, maximising happiness and minimizing suffering the really long view means we should care more about the happiness and suffering of those who will live forever in the future than those who live today. Can’t make an omelet… (or as if talibans interpreted utilitarianism.)

So there it is. TESCREAL is a litmus-test, use it to see if a broligarch is a creepy cultist or just a harmless hyper-capitalist megalomaniac. TESCREAL’s baby cousin is e/acc or “effective accelerationism” which means we should accelerate the development of AGI so it can fix our problems. (It makes for good sci-fi, in the very least) The word “problems” is key to understanding the TESCREAL world-view. If the world is full of problems that stand in the way of our development as a species/civilization/culture/insert-your-favourite-big-word, it would be great to solve them, no?

But you said something about sand? Ah, yes. That too. I’m thinking of course of the Burning Man-festival, the Nevada Desert glamping fiesta where some pay 2 500 US dollars to expand their minds, share their ideas about the inevitable path of technology and partake in sexual experimentation (maybe I’m just envious of the “sex plane”?). Elon Musk himself said “if you haven’t been, you just don’t get it”. Burning Man has come a long way from its anti-capitalist roots, just like the Silicon Valley – once a haven for hippies. Perhaps this is why higher powers released their wrath on last year’s “burners”. Or maybe that was an AGI taking control of the weather?

Posted in Blog | No Comments »

Regulation Begat Silicon Valley rather than “US Innovates, China Replicates, Europe Regulates”

Sunday, July 7th, 2024

Is it only me or has the phrase US innovates, China replicates, Europe regulates become increasingly popular? In any case, it smells like a myth. Let’s dissect it.

The narrative that only America can invent great tech companies is familiar. It’s convenient for anyone who wants to argue that things like competition, copyright, governance and responsibility stand in the way of innovation. For sure, that is a very one-sided view of innovation. Why worry about disruption of local economies? Democratic elections? Fair competition? If innovation equals techno-capitalism, the first part of the line is true.

China replicates – this one is probably true too. I’m no expert on China, but I have visited the country several times. On a shallow level, China copies a lot of brand fashion for example. On a deeper level, it puts a lot of renminbi into buzzword technologies like AI, quantum computing, future materials and such. But it’s TikTok that is China’s biggest tech hit, not necessarily a product of all that investment. Is TikTok replication of US social media? On some levels yes: it builds on user-created material and a compelling algorithm, just like YouTube or Twitch or Facebook Reels. The business model is based on harvesting user data, just like some of the Silicon Valley skyscrapers’ (except not only to share with advertisers and the NSA…). It is also fair to say that the success of TikTok is credit to re-interpretation and re-invention of this formula. Just like Snapchat or Instagram or Reddit or a long list of US tech hits. China replicates. And it re-invents. Just like the US.

Europe regulates – hehe… hard to argue with that one. The European legislator brags about having the world’s first ever AI regulation. And it is proud of its GDPR export. (Does GDPR export add to GDP? Sorry, pun intended.) But… as if China does not regulate? The Chinese government owns golden shares in the biggest tech companies. It has the Great Firewall and Sesame Social Credit. More regulation than any eurocrat would ever wish for. More importantly, US regulates too. In fact, Silicon Valley’s success relies on regulation, not least the notorious Article 230 of the Communications Decency Act – which has very little to do with decency, but grants technology providers immunity from liability for crime and violations by their users. That’s not all, where do the famous investment bankers on Palo Alto’s Sand Hill Road get the money from? Successful entrepreneurs? “High net-worths”? No, it’s public money. The federal loan guarantee programs going back to the 1950’s give four public dollars for every private. The investment bankers used this policy dating back to president Eisenhower to full effect.

So everybody regulates, but Europe creates. We may not have the huge consumer markets, internet platforms and public funding systems of the East and the West. But Europe has hundreds of thousands of creative business of all sizes building on what we like to think of as European fortés: pluralism, expression, quality.

In digital, if China is the child trying to find its way and US is the disruptive teen who wants to move fast and break things. Does that make Europe the parent?

Posted in Blog | No Comments »

Digital Policy Topics in EU Election

Thursday, June 6th, 2024

Netopia turned to AI to find out what the main party groups say about digital policy topics.

We fed their election manifestos into a large-language model and analysed the occurrence of digital policy terms.

It turns out the Greens are big on AI and S&D like culture, but nobody seems to care about copyright.The image is a bar chart titled "Digital Policy Topics in European Election Manifestos." It compares how four political groups—Greens, S&D, EPP, and Renew Europe—mention various digital policy topics in their manifestos. Each topic is listed on the y-axis, with bars representing the frequency of mentions for each group. Here are the key insights from the chart:

Click Image to View Analysis

 

 

Footnote: the total word count varies in the manifestos, so the direct comparison is an indication only.

Renew Europe manifesto is 7 910 words.

EPP manifesto is 12 893 words.

S&D manifesto is 4 274 words.

Greens manifesto is 20 642 words.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles, Infographics | Comments Off on Digital Policy Topics in EU Election

Vote AI?

Thursday, June 6th, 2024

Netopia turned to artificial intelligence for guidance in this European election.

We put the election manifestos of the main party groups into a large language model and asked it to analyse the digital policies. Read the result here: LLM analysis of key party manifestos – EU Elections 2024 – Netopia Netopia

Oh, and here is an infographic based on language analysis of the election manifestos. Looks like blocs don’t care about copyright… (at least ot in this election). Digital Policy Topics in EU Election – Netopia Netopia

But enough about the real policy-makers, what would AI do? We interviewed three LLMs about their views on digital policies: Vote AI in EU Election? – Netopia Netopia

Would you vote for a machine? In this election you can’t, maybe in the next? In any case, don’t forget to vote!

Posted in Blog | No Comments »

LLM analysis of key party manifestos – EU Elections 2024

Wednesday, June 5th, 2024

Netopia uploaded the full manifestos, all 91 pages of policy from Renew Europe, EPP, S&D and The Greens, then asked ChatGPT4o to perform an analysis based on one question:

To what extent does this manifesto talk about creativity and artist rights?

The short answer is:

Renew: touches on creativity and artist rights (including creator renumeration)
EPP: discusses creativity and artist rights to a limited extent (with focus on cultural heritage)
S&D: discusses creativity and artist rights to a modest extent (with focus on AI)
Greens: talk about creativity and artist rights to a moderate extent (including music streaming & IP)

Analysis of key EU party manifestos reveals varying emphasis on creativity and artist rights, from promoting cultural policies to protecting intellectual property.

FULL ANALYSIS

  • RENEW EUROPE

The text touches on creativity and artist rights primarily in the context of promoting European values and the protection of intellectual property. Here are the key points related to these areas:

Integration of Digital and Green Transitions into Culture and Education Policies:

The text mentions the importance of integrating the digital transition into culture and education policies. This implies a focus on modernizing the cultural sector to keep pace with technological advancements, which can affect how creative works are produced, distributed, and consumed.

Support for Innovation and Creativity:

There is an emphasis on fostering innovation across various sectors, including the creative industries. The support for innovation can indirectly benefit artists and creators by providing a conducive environment for creative expression and new forms of cultural production.

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights:

While not extensively detailed, the document supports a robust intellectual property rights framework, which is crucial for protecting the rights of creators and ensuring they receive fair compensation for their works.

Cultural and Creative Sectors:

The text highlights the significance of culture and creativity as transformative tools in society. It acknowledges the value of artistic expression both as an inherent societal good and as a political instrument to address contemporary challenges.

Legislative and Financial Support:

Calls for continued support for the production and distribution of art and culture across Europe, particularly through public funding and defending cultural expression against far-right attacks. This includes supporting experimentation and diversity in artistic and organizational forms.

European Artist Status:

The text proposes the creation of a European Artist Status to ensure good working conditions and minimum standards for artists and cultural workers across member states, especially in relation to streaming platforms.

Commitment to Media Freedom and Pluralism:

The document also supports the protection of journalistic freedom and independence, which aligns with broader efforts to protect creative expression and the free flow of information.

In summary, the document discusses creativity and artist rights to a significant extent by focusing on the integration of digital advancements into cultural policies, supporting innovation, protecting intellectual property, and proposing measures to ensure fair working conditions for artists. This reflects a commitment to fostering a vibrant cultural sector that values and protects creative expression and the rights of creators.

Read full Renew Europe Manifesto

  • EPP

The text discusses creativity and artist rights to a limited extent, focusing more broadly on European values, cultural heritage, and social issues. Here are the main points related to creativity and artist rights:

Promotion of Cultural Heritage:

The text highlights the importance of preserving and promoting European cultural heritage. It suggests the creation of a Digital Museum of European Culture and assesses the possibility of a European Cultural Heritage Fund. This reflects a commitment to safeguarding the cultural and artistic legacy of Europe.

Integration and Support for Creative Sectors:

There is mention of fostering a vibrant business environment that includes support for new creative business ideas and the sharing economy. This implies a supportive stance towards innovation in the creative industries.

Protection of Freedom of Expression and Media:

The text emphasizes the importance of freedom of speech, media freedom, and the protection of journalists. It calls for measures to combat misinformation and protect against foreign interference, which can indirectly support creative and journalistic freedoms.

Respect for Diversity and Human Rights:

The text reaffirms the commitment to fundamental rights, including those of minorities and the most vulnerable, which can encompass artists and creators. It highlights the protection of Judeo-Christian values, Humanism, and Enlightenment principles.

Overall, the text primarily focuses on broader cultural and social values rather than specific policies directly addressing creativity and artist rights. However, the commitment to preserving cultural heritage, promoting a supportive environment for creative sectors, and protecting freedom of expression are indirectly beneficial to artists and creators.

Read full EPP manifesto

  • S&D

The text discusses creativity and artist rights to a modest extent, focusing more on broader social, economic, and environmental issues. Here are the main points related to creativity and artist rights:

Promotion of Culture:

The text explicitly states the intention to promote culture in all its diversity. This reflects a commitment to supporting creative industries and ensuring the cultural richness of Europe is maintained and celebrated.

Support for Creative Sectors:

There is a mention of supporting SMEs, start-ups, cooperatives, and social economy enterprises, which can include creative industries. The emphasis on supporting female and young entrepreneurs also suggests a focus on fostering innovation and creativity.

Right to Knowledge and Culture:

The text highlights the right to knowledge and culture as a fundamental condition of democracy. This implies a commitment to making cultural and creative resources accessible to all, thereby supporting artists and cultural practitioners.

Public Services and Inclusion:

The commitment to well-funded public services includes access to inclusive education and lifelong learning opportunities, which can benefit the creative sector by providing education and training for artists and cultural workers.

Digital Rights and AI Regulation:

The text addresses the regulation of AI and the protection of online rights, ensuring that digital transformation respects EU fundamental values. This can indirectly support artists by safeguarding their digital rights and ensuring fair treatment in the digital space.

Diversity and Anti-Discrimination:

The commitment to a Europe free from discrimination, including sexism, racism, and LGBTI-phobia, suggests support for a diverse and inclusive cultural environment where artists from all backgrounds can thrive.

Overall, while the text does not focus extensively on creativity and artist rights, it includes commitments to promoting cultural diversity, supporting creative industries, ensuring access to cultural resources, and protecting digital rights, which collectively contribute to a supportive environment for artists and creativity.

Read full S&D manifesto

  • THE GREENS

The text talks about creativity and artist rights to a moderate extent, focusing on several key areas:

Cultural Significance and Support:

The text emphasizes the importance of art and culture in society, highlighting their role in telling stories, changing minds, and building solidarity. It notes that Europe’s rich cultural heritage and vibrant arts scene are core features of what unites Europe and makes it unique​​.

Freedom of Cultural Expression:

There is a commitment to supporting the freedom of cultural expression through public funding and defending it against attacks from far-right forces. This includes promoting the production and distribution of art and culture across Europe, with a focus on experimentation and diversity of expressions and organizational forms​​.

Integration with Policy Initiatives:

The text advocates for an EU strategy to engage the cultural sectors in the Green and Social Deal and in any constituent process on the future of Europe. Cultural diplomacy and exchange are mentioned as part of the accession process for countries looking to join the EU​​.

Support for Artists:

It calls for common European standards on employment, social guarantees, and working conditions in the cultural and creative sectors. There is a proposal to create a European Artist Status to ensure good working conditions and minimum standards for artists and cultural workers across member states, particularly in relation to streaming platforms​​.

Copyright and Content Creator Protections:

The text highlights the need for proper enforcement of copyright legislation in the context of AI models to fully protect content creators. It supports the concept of “data dignity,” ensuring that data generated by human actions belong first and foremost to the humans that created it​​.

Overall, while the manifesto includes several significant points related to creativity and artist rights, the primary focus remains on broader social, economic, and environmental issues.

Read full European Greens manifesto

 

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles | 1 Comment »

Vote AI in EU Election?

Wednesday, June 5th, 2024

Netopia interviewed ChatGPT4o, Google Gemini and Grok/X AI about their views on digital policy in the European election.

The upcoming EU elections in 2024 will prominently feature several key digital policy issues. These policies are crucial for shaping the future of the digital landscape in Europe. Here are the most important ones:

Q1 What are the most important digital policies in the EU election?

The most important digital policies in the EU election revolve around safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process and promoting a fair and secure digital environment. These include measures to combat disinformation, regulate online platforms, and protect user data. The Digital Services Act (DSA) plays a crucial role in this context, as it imposes obligations on online platforms to address illegal and harmful content, protect user rights, and ensure fair competition. The EU is also focusing on transparency in political advertising and the use of AI in political campaigns to ensure a level playing field and prevent manipulation. Additionally, the European Commission has issued guidelines to Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Search Engines to protect the integrity of elections from online threats, such as disinformation and cyber-enabled information manipulation. (Grok)

Citing sources, according to ChatGPT4o the most pressing policy areas are:

1. Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA): These landmark legislations aim to regulate the digital market to ensure fair competition and better user protection. The DMA targets anti-competitive practices by major tech companies, while the DSA focuses on content moderation, transparency, and accountability of online platforms​ (Bruegel)​​ (euronews)​.

2. Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act): This proposed legislation seeks to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for AI, balancing innovation with ethical considerations and risk management. The act is currently in trilogue negotiations, with a strong interest in reaching a political agreement by the end of 2023​ (Bruegel)​.

3. Data Act: The Data Act is designed to facilitate data sharing across the EU, ensuring fair access and usage of data while protecting user privacy. Political agreement on this act has been reached, and its publication is expected soon​ (Bruegel)​.

4. Cybersecurity and Digital Infrastructure: Strengthening cybersecurity measures and improving digital infrastructure are ongoing priorities. This includes initiatives to enhance cross-border digital networks and accelerate the deployment of high-speed broadband across the EU​ (Bruegel)​.

5. Digital Identity and Privacy: Enhancing digital identity frameworks and revising privacy regulations, such as the ePrivacy Regulation and GDPR, are also on the agenda. These measures aim to provide more robust protection of personal data and privacy rights for EU citizens​ (euronews)​.

Digital Education and Skills: Addressing the digital skills gap and promoting digital education are crucial for ensuring that all citizens can participate fully in the digital economy. This includes initiatives to improve digital literacy and support lifelong learning in digital skills​ (Epthinktank)​.

These digital policies reflect the EU’s commitment to creating a fair, competitive, and secure digital environment for its citizens and businesses. They are expected to be major topics of discussion and debate in the run-up to the elections, influencing both the legislative agenda and voter engagement​ (euronews)​.

 

 

Q2 – How do you want to support European digital SMEs?

Supporting European digital SMEs (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) is crucial for fostering innovation, economic growth, and competitiveness within the EU. Here are several key strategies and initiatives aimed at supporting these businesses:

Access to Finance

EU Funding Programs: The EU offers various funding programs tailored for SMEs, such as Horizon Europe, which focuses on research and innovation, and the Digital Europe Programme, which aims to enhance digital capacities and skills across the EU​ (Epthinktank)​​ (Bruegel)​.

InvestEU: This initiative provides financial support to SMEs through investments in sustainable infrastructure, research, innovation, and digitization projects​ (Bruegel)​.

Regulatory Support

Simplifying Regulations: Efforts to simplify and harmonize regulatory frameworks across member states can reduce the administrative burden on SMEs, making it easier for them to operate and scale within the single market.

Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA): These acts provide a fairer digital environment by regulating large online platforms and ensuring fair competition, benefiting smaller digital enterprises​ (Bruegel)​​ (euronews)​.

Digital Skills and Training

Digital Skills and Jobs Coalition: This initiative brings together member states, companies, and non-profits to tackle the digital skills gap and provide training and education opportunities for SMEs and their employees​ (euronews)​.

Lifelong Learning Programs: EU programs aimed at continuous education and skill development ensure that SMEs can keep up with rapid technological changes and innovations​ (Epthinktank)​.

Innovation and Research

Horizon Europe: This program supports innovation and research projects, encouraging SMEs to participate in cutting-edge research and collaborate with other entities across Europe​ (Bruegel)​.

European Innovation Council (EIC): The EIC provides funding and support for innovative SMEs, including grants and equity investments for high-risk, high-impact technologies​ (Bruegel)​.

Digital Infrastructure

Improving Connectivity: Investments in digital infrastructure, such as high-speed broadband networks and 5G, are essential for SMEs to thrive in a digital economy. The EU supports various projects to enhance digital connectivity across member states​ (Epthinktank)​​ (euronews)​.

Single Digital Gateway: This initiative aims to provide online access to information, administrative procedures, and assistance services, simplifying cross-border operations for SMEs​ (Bruegel)​.

Networking and Collaboration

Digital Innovation Hubs (DIHs): DIHs offer SMEs access to technology testing, financing advice, market intelligence, and networking opportunities with other businesses and research institutions​ (Epthinktank)​.

European Cluster Collaboration Platform: This platform encourages collaboration among SMEs, large companies, and research organizations within specific sectors, fostering innovation and growth​ (euronews)​.

These measures collectively aim to create a conducive environment for digital SMEs to innovate, grow, and compete on a global scale.

 

 

Q3 – How can Europe have a competitive advantage through creativity?

Culture and Creativity as Economic Drivers: Culture and creativity are not just about art and expression; they’re also significant contributors to the EU’s economy. They employ over 7.6 million people and play a vital role in the social, green, and digital transition. So, it’s not just about pretty pictures; it’s about economic growth, too. (Grok)

Creative Europe Program: The EU has a program called Creative Europe that supports the cultural and creative sectors. It’s like a fairy godmother for artists, helping them expand and showcase their talent. (Grok)

Protecting Intellectual Property: Protecting creative work and inventions is crucial for promoting innovation and enabling companies to grow. The EU has made significant reforms to enhance competitiveness and industrial power. So, Europe is not just about croissants and castles; it’s also about protecting your ideas. (Grok)

Collaborative Innovation Networks (COINs): COINs are like the Avengers of creativity, a group of self-motivated people with a collective vision, enabled by technology to collaborate in achieving a common goal—innovation by sharing ideas, information, and work. They’re the most productive engines of innovation ever. (Grok)

Supporting SMEs: The EU is also supporting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in protecting their innovations and creativity. After all, not all heroes wear capes; some run small businesses. (Grok)

Furthermore, Europe can leverage its rich cultural heritage, diverse talent pool, and strong educational systems to gain a competitive advantage through creativity. Here are several key strategies to achieve this:

Protecting creative work and inventions is crucial for promoting innovation and enabling companies to grow

  • Fostering a Creative Ecosystem:

Cultural and Creative Industries (CCIs): These industries include sectors such as arts, design, media, and entertainment, which are pivotal for innovation and economic growth. Supporting CCIs through funding, policy frameworks, and infrastructure can enhance their global competitiveness​ (Bruegel)​.

Creative Hubs and Incubators: Establishing hubs and incubators that bring together artists, designers, technologists, and entrepreneurs can foster collaboration and innovation. These spaces can provide resources, networking opportunities, and mentorship to creative professionals​ (Bruegel)​.

  • Promoting Cross-Sector Collaboration:

Interdisciplinary Projects: Encouraging projects that combine arts and technology can lead to groundbreaking innovations. For example, integrating digital technologies in the arts can create new forms of artistic expression and business models​ (euronews)​.

Public-Private Partnerships: Collaborations between governments, educational institutions, and private companies can support the development of creative industries by providing funding, resources, and platforms for innovation​ (Epthinktank)​.

  • Investing in Education and Skills:

Creative Education: Enhancing creative education at all levels, from primary schools to higher education, can nurture talent and encourage innovative thinking. Programs that focus on design thinking, digital skills, and artistic creativity are essential​ (Epthinktank)​​ (Bruegel)​.

Lifelong Learning: Continuous professional development and lifelong learning opportunities in creative fields ensure that the workforce remains adaptable and skilled in the latest technologies and methodologies​ (euronews)​.

  • Utilizing Digital Transformation:

Digital Platforms and Tools: Leveraging digital platforms can help creative professionals reach global audiences, market their work, and collaborate internationally. This includes e-commerce platforms, social media, and digital content creation tools​ (Bruegel)​​ (euronews)​

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Big Data: AI and big data can be used to analyze trends, personalize content, and enhance creative processes. For example, AI can assist in generating music, visual art, and design, providing new tools for creative professionals​ (Bruegel)​.

  • Supporting Intellectual Property (IP) Rights:

IP Protection: Ensuring strong IP rights protection for creative works encourages innovation by safeguarding creators’ investments and efforts. Simplifying the process for obtaining IP protection and increasing awareness about IP rights are crucial steps​ (Epthinktank)​​ (euronews)​.

  • Encouraging Entrepreneurship:

Startup Ecosystems: Supporting creative startups with access to funding, mentorship, and international markets can stimulate innovation and economic growth. Programs like startup accelerators and venture capital investments are essential​ (Bruegel)​.

Access to Markets: Facilitating easier access to both European and global markets for creative SMEs can enhance their competitiveness. Trade agreements, export support, and international collaborations are key components of this strategy​ (euronews)​.

Creativity, when effectively supported and nurtured, can become a significant competitive advantage for the region.

By implementing these strategies, Europe can solidify its position as a global hub for creativity and innovation, leading to a competitive advantage.

Google Gemini answers this question slightly more prolifically. To paraphrase Gemini AI the competitive advantages through creativity are:

The strength of a rich cultural heritage, skilled workers are the strengths of Europe. And there needs to be support from the creative industries. This could involve grants, tax breaks, and infrastructure development. There needs to be collaboration between different creative fields, universities, and businesses to spark cross-pollination of ideas and lead to groundbreaking innovation. A Europe that becomes a leader in developing creative solutions to environmental challenges, like clean technology and sustainable design, while investing in R&D for digital tools and platforms that empower creative expression and innovation can be a major differentiator.
However, to get there, Gemmi points out that there must be less bureaucracy and regulations to encourage creative risk-taking, and funding gaps need plugging.

And it is Google Gemini that has the last line with a proseic prediction, promoting not “digital champions” and outputting that: “By implementing these strategies, Europe can solidify its position as a global hub for creativity and innovation, leading to a competitive advantage.”

And to the only other big question, left to answer: Would you vote for an AI?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles | No Comments »

How Tech Disrupted State Services

Wednesday, May 29th, 2024

Review of Gateways. Comparing Digital Communication Systems in Nordic Welfare States (Nordicom, 2023), by Signe Sophus Lai and Sofie Flensburg

We’ve been barking up the wrong tree. Or, at least, while barking up the one, we’ve missed the other. While our attention has been focused on the frontend, we lost sight of the backend. The frontend, that is fake news, algorithmic bias, hate speech, troll armies, harmful content, privacy violations… you name it. Signe Sophus Lai and Sofie Flensburg, both researchers from the Copenhagen University, in their book Gateways. Comparing Digital Communication Systems in Nordic Welfare States (Open access here) wants to draw our attention to the hidden backend of these well-known phenomena:

To understand the problems and changes that occur at the frontend – …we need to understand what happens at the backend.

“To understand the problems and changes that occur at the frontend – the interfaces that meet us when we click on a website or open a mobile app – we need to understand what happens at the backend. [T] he Internet is, above all, a physical network made up of cables, servers, terminals, radio wave signals, and data packages destined for IP addresses worldwide.”

Who Owns the Internet?

All these physical resources are built, owned and controlled by someone. And although backend infrastructure is a business of its’ own, we encounter the same players that have acquired monopolies for their frontend-services: Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon are controlling fibre-optic submarine cables, operating systems, third-party tools for collecting and monetising data, and more.

Terms of service violate welfare state principles if they refuse to guarantee universal access to the Internet and equal conditions.

From a welfare state perspective, this is a problem, because the very idea of a welfare state rests on the assumption that services which are central to the functioning and wellbeing of a society should be within the state’s control. This concerns the terms of service as well as the reliability of services. Terms of service violate welfare state principles if they refuse to guarantee universal access to the Internet and equal conditions. With tracking and personalized pricing, Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook can indeed easily violate this condition. And as reliability is concerned: If one of the Tech Giants decides to shut down certain services for whatever reason, this could have a drastic impact on the daily lives of citizens. And to the extent that governments services such as healthcare and education or state-owned broadcast media are not only offering but also relying on digital services, even state’s functioning would be affected.

China, Cash and Cards

It’s not only a story about our short-sighted or biased attention, but also about an almost complete gap of knowledge concerning who -owns-what with regard to backend infrastructure

Gateways is not the only recent publication that aims at uncovering the Internet’s backend. Jonathan E. Hillman’s The Digital Silk Road: China’s Quest to Wire the World and Win the Future (2022), too, zooms in on the Internet’s physical backend. Here, the conceived threat is not commercialization (as opposed to public ownership and control), but national sovereignty and digital safety (US vs. China). Another path is opened by Brett Scott in his book, Cloud Money. Why the War on Cash Endangers Our Freedom (2022). Scott, who’s role is more that of an activist than that as a researcher, follows Lai and Flensburg in stressing the contrast of commercial vs. public, while looking not at cables and operating systems, but at digital payments and the takeover of our money-infrastructure by corporate players. In the realm of payment services, we are already experiencing what it means to rely upon a very few commercial actors for basic needs. “Maestro” is withdrawing from the European market this year. Citizens who want to pay with their card while travelling abroad must switch to Visa or Mastercard – often with much less favourable conditions. And even Visa, rumours state, delivers to the European market only as an opportunity to re-sell an already established service. Since the EU has, in 2015, capped interchange fees, the company can charge only up to 0,3% of the transaction value, while in the US it’s 2%.

Lai and Flensburg, the authors of Gateways, clearly take on the role of academic researchers, not political activists. Nevertheless, they perceive their work as an important step towards political action. It’s not only a story about our short-sighted or biased attention, but also about an almost complete gap of knowledge concerning who -owns-what with regard to backend infrastructure. With Gateways, they aim to close this gap.

Enter the IXPs

No regulations at all are directed at submarine cable markets, concentration, and ownership structures

Who owns what? And how are things regulated? Take submarine cables, for instance – cables that bring “the Internet” from one continent to another. No regulations at all, Lai and Flensburg reveal, are directed at submarine cable markets, concentration, and ownership structures—”making”submarine cables an ‘orphan’ in international law”. More or less the same applies to Internet Exchange Points, the Internet’s crossroads or hubs run by commercial companies: “There is no agency or established policies targeting IXPs specifically outside the realm of cybersecurity”.

Now What?

What’s the takeaway? Gateways delivers what it promises: a dense picture of how the Internet’s backbone has evolved in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Norway in the recent past. The book is full of charts, for instance for broadband subscriptions (who uses mobile, who DSL?), market share of subscription providers, diagrams showing the increase of numbers and length of submarine cables, types of companies involved in submarine cable laying, market actors involved in Nordic submarine cables, market ownership of Nordic IXPs, top websites and their hosting companies, charts displaying the number of individuals using the Internet for online telephone and video calls, and the like. As often with data, the story is complex, and it’s difficult to sum it all up in a single number or diagram, although Alphabet, Meta, Amazon and Microsoft clearly stand out as major players in most of the data.

Lai and Flensburg’s conclusion: For now, things are as they are. There does not seem to be an urgent concern. But this, exactly, might be the problem. In the more and more digitalized and datafied Nordic societies, they sum up, Big Tech has already “taken over key gatekeeping functions while simultaneously weakening the structural conditions and institutions of the welfare states.” The real question, they pose, is: What will the Nordic societies look like in a hundred years?

 

JFK’s Love Letter – Mail Distribution Disruption

The following story, used by the authors of “Gateways” throughout their book, illustrates the otherwise rather abstract topic: In 1955, John F. Kennedy sat down with pen and paper to write a letter to his long-distance love, Gunilla von Post, who lived in Stockholm. Almost the entire journey of the letter would be organized by state services (remember that even airplanes, these days, were run by state-owned companies). A similar love letter, sent back from Gunilla to JFK, would take a different and maybe longer route. That route would last for just two milliseconds. Almost every intersection and every segment of that route would be served by Big Tech companies.

 

Read the book via Open access here

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Books | Comments Off on How Tech Disrupted State Services

« Older Entries