Re: AI for Understanding Human Goals

A reasonable degree of skepticism is good and, yes, many of us may 
prefer not to share our plans with others -- particularly if we're 
trying to out-compete them in the marketplace, we're not actually sure 
what our goals are, we're afraid of being embarrassed by not achieving 
them, or we'd rather just wait and see what happens as a result of 
whatever we decide to do from time to time.

However, it would be interesting to learn:

    a) how U.S. federal agencies might justify failing to comply with a
    law directing them to publish their performance plans and reports in
    machine-readable format,

    b) whether tax-exempt charities who share their impact data might
    attract more donations than those who don't, and

    c) if publishing CSR reports in open, standard, machine-readable
    format might help make them more than merely feel-good marketing pieces.

A skeptic might also question whether we as individuals might be 
engaging in artificial ignorance 
<https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/artificial-ignorance-owen-ambur/> and 
fooling ourselves by failing to document and share our objective with 
those whose assistance may be required.

One way or another, the results (or lack thereof) will speak for 
themselves.  The question is whether anyone will be listening ... and 
how hard it is to "hear" what those results might be.  (If a tree falls 
in the forest 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest> ...)

In any event, the Skeptics Society's about statement is now available in 
StratML format at https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#SKPTCS
<https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#SKPTCS>

Owen


On 1/30/2021 11:39 AM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote:
> CORRECTED FOR TYPOS AND OMISSION OF TEXT FRAGMENTS by Draft Save Email 
> feature.
>
> Dear Paola, Chris, Owen and other members of the list.
>
> I agree totally with not getting stuck in an infinite (To) Do Loop.
>
> The problem stated by Paola is very real, and has only become worse 
> because of the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing chaos and lack of 
> consensus based resolve to move forwards towards a different business 
> as usual in tackling, overcoming or learning to deal with COVID-19 in 
> the background forever, as hinted by the CEO of Moderna and countless 
> other medical experts and scientists.
>
> The pandemic has also laid bare many wrongs, like the inequalities 
> stratification in demographic, ethnic and income groups in society, 
> and thanks to Timnit Gebru, fired from Google, we are now also 
> painfully aware how this is reflected in AI algorithms used in many 
> real-time commercial, industrial and even scientific settings for a 
> wide range of applications.
>
> On a personal note, I was pissed to learn on my birthday, January 28, 
> that the participants of the virtual Davos World Economic Forum, had 
> concluded that "The Great Reset" was needed.
>
> If anyone is familiar with the publications of the World Economic 
> Forum and books co-authored by its chairman Klaus Schwab, is that this 
> proposed "Great Reset" will usher in a Brave New World, much like the 
> one touted by Aldous Huxley in which artificial intelligence will be 
> even more inappropriately used.
>
> Chris is also right, total transparency won't work in business 
> settings, because of the obvious need to guard patents, processes and 
> intellectual properties.
>
> I checked on the status of the Creative Commons and Science Commons 
> projects and to my dismay found them to be withering away.
>
> When we look at the very competitive world of academic and open 
> science publishing, pre-print and unreviewed publications, often 
> through arxiv.org have become a de facto norm in particular for 
> anything scientifically related to the wide spectrum of issues of 
> COVID-19.
>
> IMHO the way forward is to in our W3 AIKR CG set some goals, and focus 
> on deliverables, and above all publish articles, or collective works, 
> and in close collaboration with the steering bodies of the W3, 
> determine the most appropriate modus operandi for making our thoughts, 
> academic and research and other efforts known to the academic, 
> scientific and corporate worlds at large.
>
> The pursuit of science requires openness, open access to critical 
> information, and if you can prove that any thought or intellectual 
> work committed to paper or a digital file, has a time stamp and 
> verifiable proof of author attached to it, you should be covered by 
> international copyright laws.
>
> In my country I can submit any intellectual or artistic work to the 
> national Intellectual Property Office, and receive time stamped proof 
> of submission and printed and authenticated proof of intellectual 
> property. This in accordance with international treaties can be used 
> to settle any disputes about intellectual property rights, in or 
> leading up to patent right procedures.
>
> In line with the Skeptics Society's claims about the pursuit of 
> science, we are forced to work with our peers, bounce off ideas, and 
> in the process incur the wrath, scorn, rejection or attempts of 
> intellectual property theft by our peers. Nothing new there.
>
> Three quotes from Albert Einstein
>
> "The ideals which have lighted me on my way and time after time given 
> me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been truth, goodness, and 
> beauty."
>
> "Three rules of work: Out of clutter find simplicity; From discord 
> find harmony; In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity."
>
> “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep 
> moving."
>
>
> Milton Ponson
> GSM: +297 747 8280
> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
> Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development 
> to all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on 
> applied mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development
>
>
> On Saturday, January 30, 2021, 7:43:13 AM AST, Chris Fox 
> <chris@chriscfox.com> wrote:
>
>
> Paola,
>
> I run a virtual networking group for business strategists which meets 
> weekly to discuss issues of interest.
>
> A few weeks ago we discussed the topic of transparency versus secrecy 
> in business strategy. You can see some summary notes of the discussion 
> at https://www.stratnavapp.com/Articles/transparency 
> <https://www.stratnavapp.com/Articles/transparency> . Although we 
> focused on business strategy, I am sure you can extrapolate much of it 
> to goals in general.
>
> The conclusion, if you don't want to read the whole thing:
>
>   * Whilst there are many advantages in transparency, there may be
>     commercial or legal/regulatory reasons for maintaining some secrecy.
>   * Where we have discretion there may be a balance to be struck. The
>     right balance will depend on the degree of alignment between the
>     different stakeholder groups.
>
> I am sure we'd all love to live in a world where everyone shares and 
> works in harmony towards common goals. But the truth is that the world 
> is more messy than that.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Chris
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 05:39, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com 
> <mailto:paoladimaio10@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Owen, I have had some realization that leads me to reconsider
>     Sharing goals and strategies works in cooperative environments, while
>     much of the world we live in is adversarial, in some cases,
>     viciously so
>     When we expose our goals and strategies, it turns out someone out
>     there may have
>     made their goals and strategy to outsmart you, and you are
>     providing them the means
>     for the to do so
>     I never thought this would be possible, I never thought someone
>     would make their sole goal in life
>     to prove me wrong, but looking back I suspect it has happened, and
>     still happens today
>     The more I am hones and open, the more someone leads me into
>     exploiting these feautures to achieve their goal
>     which is to prevent me from achieving my goals . It took me
>     a lifetime to figure out.
>     So let me think again :-)
>
>     Lets share our goals and strategies only within certain
>     boundaries, and in the meantime
>     I think keeping our personal goals closely guarded in our hearts
>     works best, although
>     surely someone may try to steal them as well
>
>     :-)
>
>     Let me think
>
>     PDM
>
>
>     On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 6:22 AM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net
>     <mailto:Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>> wrote:
>
>         Paola, while "adequacy" depends upon subjective judgment, it
>         seems to me
>         that documenting human goals in open, standard,
>         machine-readable format
>         might be a good step along the way toward deciding where we'd
>         like to go
>         next.
>
>         Conversely, it seems to me that failing to do so leaves us
>         hung up in a
>         pointless Do Loop.
>
>         Owen
>
>         On 1/26/2021 10:57 PM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>         > when it comes to stratml, is it adequate to represent human
>         goals?
>
>
>
> -- 
> Chris Fox
> Chris C Fox Consulting Limited
> chris@chriscfox.com <mailto:chris@chriscfox.com>
> +44 77 860 21712
> <http://www.chriscfox.com> 
> <https://calendar.x.ai/chriscfox/freeconsult> 
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/chriscfox/> 
> <https://twitter.com/chriscfox> <https://www.facebook.com/StrategicCoffee>
> Have you tried https://www.StratNavApp.com 
> <https://www.stratnavapp.com/>, the online collaborative tool for 
> strategy development and execution?
>
> Chris C Fox Consulting Limited is registered in England and Wales as a 
> Private Limited Company: Company Number 6939359. Registered Office: 
> Unit 4 Vista Place, Coy Pond Business Park, Ingworth Road, Poole BH12 1JY