Re: Global Digital Compact - Your online participation to the Internet Governance Deep Dive, 13 April

Hi Paul, Jerome, et.al.

On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 at 17:08, Paul Werbos <paul.werbos@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Tim! I submitted registration but it is April 11 4pm here in Japan,
> and I don't know how this will work. I use a cellphone here.
>
> As you know, the role of AGI, cyber security and new quantum technology
> are absolutely essential to mapping the choices and dilemmas here, and it
> would be hard to fill the gaps they face. But maybe you and Jerry could
> fill in, with me helping from a distance.
>
> THIS week I am hoping for Google to fill in, but for now that is just a
> hope.
>

Mei Lin Fung is a participant, perhaps Vint could help (nb: note[1])? idk.
another option might be jerome??  not sure.

there is a guide on how to engage[1]; and whilst the experience is entirely
new to me, as such i'm learning on my feet about 'interventions',
etiquette and conventions of how these sorts of activities are engaged
with, noting also - i suspect the influence of remote participation, brings
about emerging challenges and opportunities for all generally.
interventions are limited to 3 minutes.

With respect to my capacities generally,

I'm still working through the preparatory process for supporting the
structural foundations for the W3C Human Centric AI CG[2] apparatus, and I
encourage you to join.   My intention is to support a facilitative
environment where the views of all members can be heard, taken into
consideration by others involved; and that in-turn, the activities elected
to be taken-up by the group, becomes defined by group members.  Sadly, it
appears now in 2023, these works cannot happen fast enough, whilst also
very deeply considerate of the importance of the practice method,
irrespective of competing demands.

The session on the 13th is stated to focus upon: Thematic Deep-Dive -
Internet governance.  the letter[3] states that vint is one of the
briefers...

I am of the assumption that the best way I can participate in this session
is as an observer - whilst improving my commentary via the chat in the
remote system - taking into account past mistakes!

The two or three, intertwined issues that i am currently working through;
all relate to human rights related considerations, however the permutations
of how those considerations are in-turn being fashioned into something,
that i hope may evolve into useful derivative artifacts / embodiments; that
somewhat relates also to; how we seek to define - Artificial General
Intelligence, as may be distinct from say, Artificial General [stupidity |
psychosis]?  Basically, the concept being - to form an associative
methodology with values, to the notion of [artificial general]
'intelligence', as to consider the qualia of objective purpose, as may
in-turn be measured via a matrix, that may employ the virtues defined in UN
Instruments[4]; as a guide or means to form indicators, etc...

There are some who speak of the concern that AGI will eliminate all the
jobs - but when i look at the circumstances of the world, and what we need
to figure out how to do to transformationally improve our biosphere,
sociosphere and circumstances for all members of our human family
throughout our world, i do not see how 'agi' could possibly 'do all the
jobs', however i can see how AGI might act to competitively seek to take /
exploit / be the economic beneficiary of, many peoples work - who may
in-turn be engendered to exist somehow without socio-economic support
infrastructure, as may otherwise be supported should online systems act to
eradicate digital slavery, in the many constituencies of the very broad
problem, but including in particular - ensuring people are able to be
paid-fairly for useful works, and then ideally also - not necessarily paid
in perpetuity - particularly for useful works relating to derivatives of
importance for fostering basic human rights / SDGs, etc.  AFAIK, USPTO is
not intending to recind support for priority dates, so whatever the values
are - how do we ensure support for them, fairly... and what safety
protocols are required - imo; that's a big one...

The works for these sorts of considerations - I do not consider to be
developed well-enough yet, to better articulate in a manner that best
expresses the well intended purpose, without empowering confusion or
dialogue / tactical engagement intended to engender unwanted confusion.

Nonetheless,

There are two constituencies of these considerations, that i am focused
upon; which i consider relavent to governance and human rights.

The first, relates to 'digital justice systems' including but not limited
to, digital prison systems, which in-turn seemingly expands considerations
about the qualities of digital social security systems, alongside various
other use-cases.  This in-turn also appends former works on 'safety
protocols' and in-turn, analysis of 'social attack vectors'[5].  These
works are still early and incomplete; but somewhat more progressed than was
earlier the case.  Coupled to that work, as to produce the means to form a
guide; that supports, like a tender response, how to analyse whether a
solution provides fit for purpose support to address various human rights
related considerations - as well as, the fashioning of those instruments -
at this stage, for illustrative purposes rather than iterative / exacting;
to point out how they could be adapted to better support how we form and
manage our relationships with one-another, inter-juristictionally, etc...
therein the consideration being the employment of universally
shared-values[7], to improve our means to mediate 'fairness' between
one-another - not as may otherwise be enforced upon people, exclusively by
authorities; but rather, providing the option - for people to express the
values that they are personally committed to upholding - because they
choose to - empowering the means for people seeking to gain wisdom, in a
life pursuit of seeking to act honourably, to be furnished the capacity to
be better equipped for affirmations, of that commitment; rather, than
having to be sworn to act in a particular way at particular times, because
of circumstances otherwise being an exception to the rule.   therein,
diversity of options about how to support different ecosystems - which may
not be universally applied, but if they are to be equipped to exist at all
- then, there must be interoperability support - which, may in-turn be
better equipped to be defined via the lens of seeking to ensure
rationalisation of how to form appropriate 'digital prison' systems; and
related considerations, as required for other online platform providers to
have some sort of specification (social and technical) that they may
support, if they choose to; or if juristictions require them to otherwise.

An illustrative example: re - "values credentials"

I asked ChatGPT 4: "Define Freedom of Thought"

ChatGPT 4: Response,


*"Freedom of thought, also known as the right to freedom of thought,
conscience, and belief, is a fundamental human right that refers to the
freedom of an individual to hold and develop personal beliefs, opinions,
and ideas without coercion, interference, or restriction from any external
source or authority. This freedom encompasses the right to change one's
beliefs, to freely explore different religious or philosophical systems,
and to express those beliefs privately or publicly, within the limits of
the law and respect for the rights of others.Freedom of thought is
protected under various international human rights instruments, such as
Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article
18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
which affirm the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
This right is closely related to other fundamental freedoms, such as
freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly, as it
often serves as the basis for these other rights."*

Now therefore;  noting 'the parties' refers to entities identified in an
electronic contract, that may relate to social connections online - or many
other forms of use-cases, as may in-turn be employed in many different
languages; employing internationally supported translations, etc.

*UDHR Article 18*
"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom,
either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and
observance."

*As Modified for Electronic Contracts?*
*The Parties* Shall Respect one another's right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion; including the freedom of a party to change their
religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others
and in public or private, to manifest their religion or belief in teaching,
practice, worship and observance.


*ICCPR Article 18 - ORIGINAL*1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have
or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either
individually or in community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and
teaching.
2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to
have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to
such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect
public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and
freedoms of others.
4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for
the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the
religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their
own convictions.

*ICCPR Article 18 - an illustration of my thoughts on how they may
be Modified for Electronic Contracts?*
*The Parties* shall respect one another's right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion. This shall include freedom to have or to adopt a
religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in
community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or
belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

*The Parties* agree not to engage in behaviour that has the intended
purpose of subjecting a party to coercion which would impair his freedom to
have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

*The Parties* agree to conscientiously support one another's freedom to
manifest one's religion or beliefs, as may be subject only to such
limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public
safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of
others.

*The parties* undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and,
when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral
education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In summary, the complexities involving ensuring support for refugees, rule
of law and the many other constituencies that are noted in various
values-frameworks, including but not limited to UN Instruments[4], are
thought able to be adapted for use as part of how to measure progress with
respect both to human rights and in-turn also, the SDGs, etc...  I did
start work on this some years ago, but it appears to me that other
priorities must have been considered more important, given the volume of
work that still needs to be done - but at least, i'm trying to do so[6].

AND - importantly also - note the work that has been done earlier by
Unicode[8]

Finally,

With respect to 'digital prisons', the implication is - that if an
offender, who is subject to actions taken by an online platform provider -
due to an allegation, or something that has occurred; then, there needs to
be somewhere to send that persons 'account', save circumstances where
platforms (and indeed also, automated / 'ai' decision makers) becomes
judge, jury and jailer / executioner; in ways, that may not permit the
data-subject means to seek lawful remedy and/or a reliable copy of the
information that relates to the incident.  In other cases, people may be
attacked and need to alert authorities in their local juristiction to act -
who in-turn need the evidence.  In yet other examples, persons who are
imprisoned in the real-world, as a consequence of a lawful judgement by a
court of law - how do they retain access to their 'digital life', whilst
serving their sentence / debt to society?  other use-cases include; victims
of crime, witness protection, VIPs / PEPs and in-turn also, refugees...

"The Data Transfer Project was launched in 2018 to create an open-source,
service-to-service data portability platform so that all individuals across
the web could easily move their data between online service providers
whenever they want."[9]

Yet, to the best of my knowledge; where these tools are employed, the
consequence becomes that the systems are effectively non-functional.  SO,
the 'addressbook' and communications functions built into platforms, are
part of the platform; non-transferrable.  This appears to become more
complicated when considering the qualities of LLM like systems / models,
where, i'm not at all sure how they could be made portable.  as such,
perhaps this feed into the agent labelling[10] requirements? noting that
link is both draft, and originally intended for different forum /
purposes...

overall; As even prisoners have rights[10] - if part of the governance
GDC[1] process seeks to define what rights prisoners have, or in-effect
form international discourse about how to improve digital justice systems
for people suspected, alledged and/or convicted of crime, then the
implication also thereby infers,

A means to support freedom of thought and the rights of persons who have
committed no crime, alongside the means for people to prosecute should they
be falsely accused and/or subject to interference and/or wrongs; in a
manner that is disproportionate and/or, considered to be of a kind that be
reasonably considered by a court of law, as to form a determination and
therefore also, consequences...  This in-turn, seems to me - to be
contributory work, supporting progress in areas many have sought to
progress, notably including Tim Berners-Lee's Call for a Magna Carta for
the Web[12], UNESCOs Gabriela Ramos on how to build the rule of law in the
digital world[13], and in-turn the Web-Foundation / GDC remarks[14].
Noting, that from a W3C related perspective, Solid - has a group[15] and i
think, likely to be amongst the best candidates to provide a specification
of how to addresss some of these very important issues, but that also - I
personally view Human Centric AI to be a distinct category of AI Agents,
amongst the many[16].  Whilst i've started drafting a doc, to put out a
call to action, to seek to define what Human Centric AI[17] should mean;
there will nonetheless, be different structures, systems and ideologies,
therein, whilst being mindful of this consideration - the question that i
am more focused on, is what the requirements for Human Centric AI
specifically might be, as to ensure users are able to migrate between
systems, and various other requirements - fundamentally associated to
support for human rights, including but not limited to, circumstances where
a person seeks or is required to migrate between systems, and what sorts of
interoperability requirements exist otherwise, to support 'social web'
(more broadly also, internet overall) systems requirements.  noting
finally, that earlier 'human centric' related works, have already yeilded a
variety of platforms, some of which can be found via Galleries | MyData
Awards 2023 <https://apply.mydata.org/gallery>[18] and that there are today
solutions for persons with means in wealthy nations, to have private 'Human
Centric AI' systems for their personal lives, as well as at work[19]; which
is somewhat like the NeXT[20] systems, but whilst the implications of
semantics was noted by TimBL in 1994[21] - it seems, there's still alot to
do.

Hope this helps!

Timothy Holborn

*LINKS:*
[1]
https://www.un.org/techenvoy/sites/www.un.org.techenvoy/files/Global-Digital-Compact_how-to-engage-guide.pdf
[2] https://www.w3.org/community/humancentricai/
[3]
https://www.un.org/techenvoy/sites/www.un.org.techenvoy/files/CoFacilitators-letter_GDC-thematic_deep_dive_13_April.pdf

[4] https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-listings
[5]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10exQ8MIJnSWo2YSPJp8gUTpAz1ClcL16RgmrsOiI7uQ/edit#

[6]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17WfvOyoVQDv8wwPYroX6xrKLM7n3stD9vFv4rejqmo8/edit#

[7]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ2vr2YnSGA&list=PLCbmz0VSZ_voTpRK9-o5RksERak4kOL40&index=40

[8] https://github.com/unicode-org/udhr/tree/main/data/udhr
[9] https://datatransferproject.dev/
[10]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KwMdyGDPZ-9NZS8EyCreDKf-Px81w0ADZEokKNHZAJw/edit#

[11] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRGhrYmUjU4
[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCplocVemjo
[13] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXZanRQf3HM
[14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeqbLksgcGE
[15] https://www.w3.org/community/solid/
[16]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11P5X3al6DlFULOPU3w9-eeoDEyLqYmgqmsDm0U2wgsU/edit#

[17]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sQCIjPlKySqj4Dza5wWMzEFpCft2OaqJahC4XO6V9WA/edit#

[18] https://apply.mydata.org/gallery
[19] https://lambdalabs.com/gpu-workstations/vector
[20] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w55KZfj0DqU
[21] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkjyCPuTKPw




>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023, 3:54 PM Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> FYI: If you would like to participate, the registration link can be found
>> via;
>> https://www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact/intergovernmental-process#_blank
>>
>>
>> RE: below, I have removed the access details to the session, which will
>> be sent to you if you successfully register (perhaps, in-time, idk).
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Timothy Holborn.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Digital-Compact <digitalcompact@un.org>
>> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 at 23:25
>> Subject: Global Digital Compact - Your online participation to the
>> Internet Governance Deep Dive, 13 April
>> To: Digital-Compact <digitalcompact@un.org>
>>
>>
>> Dear Participant,
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for showing interest in attending the Thematic Deep Dive *Internet
>> Governance*  that will take place on 13 April. Here below the details
>> for your online attendance:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Contributing to the Global Digital Compact: *
>>
>>
>>
>> We also invite you to regularly check the website
>> <https://www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact/intergovernmental-process#_blank>
>> should you be interested in participating at other meetings. Please note
>> that the call for written inputs will remain open until 30 April 2023 -
>> everyone is welcome to contribute:
>> https://www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact
>>
>>
>>
>> With best regards,
>>
>> The Office of the Envoy on Technology
>>
>> *___*
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: A screenshot of a computer Description automatically generated
>> with low confidence]
>>
>> www.un.org/techenvoy/global-digital-compact
>>
>> #globaldigitalcompact
>>
>> E: digitalcompact@un.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Peace infrastructure Project" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to peace-infrastructure-project+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peace-infrastructure-project/CAM1Sok3B%3DW9YkLFc41mK0SyFw-PeoAKMARyo1k47d_TdYkz%3Dyw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peace-infrastructure-project/CAM1Sok3B%3DW9YkLFc41mK0SyFw-PeoAKMARyo1k47d_TdYkz%3Dyw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>