Posted in law, policy, security, transportation
We may also process your information for legitimate reasons associated with your use or ownership of an Aston Martin car, for reasons concerning information or network security, to defend or pursue legal rights or to meet regulatory requirements. Any information processed for contacts based in the EU will not be transferred outside the EU.
I’m not that interested in this on the movie end, because i think most movies already suck, and couldnt really get any worse.
AUDREY HEPBURN DIED in 1993, but in 2013 she nevertheless starred in an advertisement for Galaxy, a type of chocolate bar. She was shown riding a bus along the Amalfi coast before catching the eye of a passing hunk in a convertible. In 2016 Peter Cushing, who died in 1994, reprised his role as the villainous Grand Moff Tarkin in the Star Wars film “Rogue One”. Such resurrections are not new, but they are still uncommon enough to count as news. Yet advances in special effects—and, increasingly, in artificial intelligence (AI)—are making it ever easier to manufacture convincing forgeries of human beings.
In recent months this has led to concern that propagandists will use the technology to generate videos in which political figures appear to say compromising things. A video created by BuzzFeed, a news website, in April shows Barack Obama apparently saying “We’re entering an era in which our enemies can make it look like anyone is saying anything at any point in time,” for example. In May a Belgian political party produced a fake video of Donald Trump saying implausible things about Belgium’s climate policy. In both cases the video looks slightly off, and the voice is provided by an impersonator. But the technology is improving fast, prompting a dozen AI researchers to place bets on whether a fake video will disrupt America’s midterm elections later this year. (Tim Hwang, a Harvard academic, is overseeing the wager.)
Whatever happens in the arena of fake news, the same techniques are sure to revolutionise fiction of a different kind, in the form of film and television. In future, actors need not be creatures of flesh and blood, but could, like so many other things in an increasingly digitised world, exist as nothing more than long strings of 1s and 0s. Such digital actors would sit quietly in digital storage systems until their services were needed—there would be no need for luxury trailers, chefs and make-up people.
Dont really care about the competition, but this horse race means AI hitting the 100 IQ level at or before 2029 should probably happen.
The race to become the global leader in artificial intelligence (AI) has officially begun. In the past fifteen months, Canada, Japan, Singapore, China, the UAE, Finland, Denmark, France, the UK, the EU Commission, South Korea, and India have all released strategies to promote the use and development of AI. No two strategies are alike, with each focusing on different aspects of AI policy: scientific research, talent development, skills and education, public and private sector adoption, ethics and inclusion, standards and regulations, and data and digital infrastructure.
This article summarizes the key policies and goals of each national strategy. It also highlights relevant policies and initiatives that the countries have announced since the release of their initial strategies.
I plan to continuously update this article as new strategies and initiatives are announced. If a country or policy is missing (or if something in the summary is incorrect), please leave a comment and I will update the article as soon as possible.
Some of the new weapons, which are set to enter service in Russia between 2018 and 2027, surpass the existing and even future weapons systems used by other nations, including the NATO member states, Borisov said as he listed what he called six Russian cutting-edge weapons.
The Russian Armed Forces are expected to get new state-of-the-art weapons systems, which have no equals anywhere in the world, a Russian government’s top official said. The new equipment is set to enter service within a decade.
The Russian military is undergoing a large-scale rearmament, which will allow it to make use of some of the world’s most advanced weapon systems, Yury Borisov, the Russian deputy prime minister, who oversees Russia’s military-industrial complex and military-technical policy, said during his speech at the Military Academy of the General Staff.
Give People Money: How a Universal Basic Income Would End Poverty, Revolutionize Work, and Remake the World” (Crown), by the economic journalist Annie Lowrey, is the latest book to argue that a program in this family is a sane solution to the era’s socioeconomic woes. Lowrey is a policy person. She is interested in working from the concept down. “The way things are is really the way we choose for them to be,” she writes. Her conscientiously reported book assesses the widespread effects that money and a bit of hope could buy.
It has enthusiasts on both the left and the right. Maybe that’s the giveaway, Nathan Heller writes.
I’m excited to share my interview with Jakub Dymek on #transhumanism in the new edition of The Aspen Institute (Eastern Europe) quarterly Aspen Review magazine.
Let’s think about this: what happens when sometime in the future the whole generation of Chinese kids have higher IQs than their American peers, because they’re technologically hardwired for that? Will this be a national security issue? This is a global security issue—says Zoltan Istvan in an interview with Jakub Dymek.
JAKUB DYMEK: You are a transhumanist—member of a movement endorsing technologically augmented advancement of human species and using technology to extend our capabilities. What does transhumanist thinking bring into the world of policy debate in the US and worldwide and how politically influential it is?
ZOLTAN ISTVAN: Transhumanism influences politics today only a little bit. But at the same time, transhumanist movement grows exponentially, like 1000% every year. So I think its implications for the policy debate here in the US and globally will only grow in scale and importance, obviously. Transhumanism can define policy debate of the future, of that I’m sure. President Trump can say today that manufacturing jobs and jobs in general are lost because of immigrants. But he wouldn’t be able to say the same thing up until 2020 campaign, because it’s simply not true, and more people realize the simple fact that jobs aren’t lost to immigration, but automation. It’s tech “stealing the jobs” he is going to have to say then. And you cannot build a wall to stop technology from spreading. This is how transhumanism is already shaping this debate. And it goes beyond jobs.
Covering roofs and walls of buildings with vegetation is a good way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And these green roofs and walls make cities look nicer. Toronto’s central business district adopted a policy of establishing green roofs on around half of all city buildings in 2009. Research shows this could reduce maximum city temperatures by up to 5℃.
We spent the past 12 months analysing the case for more greenery on Australian city buildings, drawing on international comparisons. We’ve shown that a mandatory policy, coupled with incentives to encourage new and retrofitted green roofs and walls, will provide environmental, social and business benefits.
These include improved air quality, energy conservation and reductions in stormwater run-off from buildings, which would decrease flash flooding. Green roofs and walls also become new habitats for biodiversity and can be pleasant spaces for social interaction in dense urban areas.
Posted in energy, government, law, military, policy
He formerly headed the U.S. federal safety agency responsible for overseeing all energy & hazmat transportation by air, land, sea, rail and pipelines as the head of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) at the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). He also served as the federal government&s;s top trucking, bus, and moving industry attorney as the Chief Counsel of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), also at the USDOT.
A retired a commissioned officer and naval aviator, his military service included tours of duty in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. During his time he participated in military combat and humanitarian relief operations around the globe.
An avid traveler and student of history, he spends his time covering public policy impact issues for Forbes and other publications and provides legal and advisory services to public and private sector clients interested in matters pertaining to defense, energy, transportation, homeland security, and the environment.
The question was asked of me as columnist at Quora.com: Will governments eventually ‘approve’ of cryptocurrency? First let’s agree on terminology…
A blockchain-based cryptocurrency that is open source, permissionless, capped, fast, frictionless, with a transparent history—and without proprietary or licensing restrictions is good for everyone. It is good for consumers; good for business; and it is even good for government.
Of course, politicians around the world are not quick to realize this. It will take years of experience, education, and policy experimentation.
Many pundits and analysts have the impression that shifting to cryptocurrency—not just as a payment instrument, but as the money itself—will never be supported by national governments. A popular misconception suggests that a cryptocurrency based economy has these undesirable traits:
Over time, perceptions will change, because only the last entry is true. Adoption of cryptocurrency puts trust into math rather than the whims of transient politicians. It helps governments avoid the trap of hoisting debt on future generations or making promises to creditors that they cannot keep—Yet, it does not lead to the maladies on this list.
But, what about that last item? Does an open source currency cause a nation to lose control over its own monetary policy? Yes! But it is not bad! Crypto cannot be printed, gamed or manipulated. Despite perception, it is remarkably resistant to loss or theft. Early hacks and fiascos were enabled by a lack of standards, tools and education. As with any new technology—especially one that changes practices or institutions—adoption of radical processes goes hand-in-hand with gradual understanding and acceptance of benefits.
How Does Crypto Help Governments?
Adopting/accepting a national (or international) cryptocurrency is a terrific way for governments to earn the respect and trust of citizens, businesses, consumers and especially creditors. There is no more reason for governments to control their money supply than there is for them to control communication networks, space travel or package delivery services.
You may not agree that cryptocurrency is good for government, and so I expand on the topic here. But your question doesn’t ask if it is good, it asks if governments are likely to approve.
Yes. Eventually…
First, a few forward thinking countries like Iceland, Japan or UAE will spearhead adoption of a true, permissionless cryptocurrency (or at least recognize it as legal tender) . Later, ‘stress-economies’ will join the party: These are countries that need to control either rampant inflation, a reluctance to tax citizens, treasury mismanagement or massive international debt. A solution to these problems requires restoration of public trust. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Greece, Zimbabwe, Venezuela or Argentina in the mix.*
Eventually, G7 countries will tread into a growing ocean. Not now; but in 5 or 8 years. The conditions are not yet right. It requires further vetting by early adopters, continued development, education and then popular consumer adoption. But all of these things are inevitable. Eventually, governments will recognize that a capped, trusted, transparent, math-based money is far better for all stakeholders than money based on intrinsic value, promise-of-redemption or force.
* We are not discussing countries that plan to create their own cryptocurrency. None of these plans involve a coin that is open source, permissionless, decentralized and capped. They are simply replacing paper with a national debit card. But it is not crypto.
Philip Raymond co-chairs CRYPSA, hosts the New York Bitcoin Event and is keynote speaker at Cryptocurrency Conferences. He sits on the New Money Systems board of Lifeboat Foundation. Book a presentation or consulting engagement.
