Female robots: Why this ‚Scarlett Johansson‘ bot is more dangerous than you think (Telegraph)
Der Philosoph Blay Whitby über Roboter, die optisch bestimmten Personen nachempfunden sind:
„Whitby urges us to act now, before it’s too late. ‚We need to have these discussions instead of waking up one day when robot companions are normal and question whether it was a good idea or not,‘ he says.
And as this kind of technology rolls out around the world in the form of 3D printing, he has a stark warning about where the democratisation of technology is taking us: ‚How would you feel about your ex boyfriend getting a robot that looked exactly like you, just in order to beat it up every night?‘
It’s a shocking idea, isn’t it? On the one hand, it’s a machine – it isn’t you. But then, it is you, because it stands for you, and who you are.
Whitby goes on: ‚I mean, it might be alright, it might mean he can be calmer and more normal with you – think about Aristotle’s theory of catharsis. But we really haven’t discussed this as a society. We’re drifting towards it and the technology is very close to being available, but we just aren’t talking about it.`“
Can we replace politicians with robots? (The Conversation)
Frank Mois und Jonathan Roberts:
„Policy-making is and will remain inherently political and policies are at best evidence-informed rather than evidence-based. But can some issues be depoliticised and should we consider deploying robots to perform this task?
Those focusing on technological advances may be inclined to answer “yes”. After all, complex calculations that would have taken years to complete by hand can now be solved in seconds using the latest advances in information technology. (…) Those focusing on social and ethical aspects, on the other hand, will have reservations. Technological advances are of limited use in policy issues involving competing beliefs and value judgements.
A fitting example would be euthanasia legislation, which is inherently bound up religious beliefs and questions about self-determination. We may be inclined to dismiss the issue as exceptional, but this would be to overlook that most policy issues involve competing beliefs and value judgements, and from that perspective robot politicians are of little use.“
Eine sehr interessante Debatte, die zumindest über staatliche Einrichtungen wie Behörden mittelfristig geführt werden wird.
Why the Gig Economy is Sputtering (Steven Hill via Medium)
„Indeed, the reality that the sharing economy visionaries can’t seem to grasp is that not everyone is cut out to be a gig-preneur, or to ‚build out their own businesses,‘ as Leah Busque likes to say. Being an entrepreneur takes a uniquely wired brand of individual with a distinctive skill set, including being ‚psychotically optimistic,‘ as one business consultant put it. Simply being jobless is not a sufficient qualification. In addition, apparently nobody in Silicon Valley ever shared with Kan or Busque the old business secret that ‚you get what you pay for.‘ That’s a lesson that Uber’s Travis Kalanick seems determined to learn the hard way as well.“
Guter Blick auf „Uber für X“ aus den vergangenen Jahren und die Naivität bei Entwicklung und Rezeption der Sharing Economy.
“I had so many advantages, and I barely made it”: Pinterest engineer on Silicon Valley sexism (Quartz)
„It was no wonder that I felt like I didn’t belong: my status as one of the few women in computer science classes was always a subject of discussion. A few of my friends joked that as a girl, I could at least get more attention from the section leaders. They told me about a couple of other girls in my year who had had great success flirting shamelessly with the teaching staff—nerdy awkward guys unaccustomed to female attention, and therefore overly eager to be helpful in office hours. I wondered if the implication was that I ought to do the same—or that in their eyes, I already was.“
Wenn Deine Eltern Programmierer aus dem Silicon Valley sind, Du es nach Stanford schaffst aber trotzdem dort und in den Tech-Firmen „die Frau“ bist.