[Davide]

#3718

Hi everyone, hi Paolo,
thank you for the info. Here’s my LinkedIn page: Davide Toniolo.

Have a good weekend,
Davide

[Davide]

#3688

Hi everyone,
if the forum is going to be closed today, then, it’s been a wonderful experience and I’m looking forward to meet you at the aperitivo.

As a final word, I want to state my support to @valentina: her remark his of fundamental importance. Recently I’m having lots of medical checkups for laser eye surgery and it is really baffling that I’ve never head a clinician say “surely” or “never”. They always talk with “highly  likely”, “very unlikely”, “probably” through they possess literally a library of knowledge on the topic. They know that in some environments our universe is too complicated for complete understanding and prediction, but it’s a view that’s sadly missing in non-scientific people.

See you tomorrow night, cheers!
Davide

[Davide]

#3572

Hi guys,
it’s been a busy time for me and I’ve had been able to reply less frequently than I’d like to. I’ve decided to change my major, so the last weeks have been quite hard and stressful.

Biohacking: so cool!
Anyway, @jessinthebox96 the videos you shared are really valuable. Both in explaining what CSPR really is and how much of what we’re discussing is actual or far in the future. I’m happy to realize that in the last years the fact that technology evolves extremely fast and unpredictably has become obvious to everyone. This leads to a healthy “let’s see what could go wrong” approach that can foresee issues years in advance, which I believe it’s the correct approach to developing technology.

Biohacking has a certain je ne sais quoi that attracts me, but at the same time I would never practice it. I fit into that category of people that would never have anything implanted in his/her body that’s not strictly necessary: it feels like violating something sacred, and for vanity or superficial matters. Stil, as a physics graduate, the possibility of feeling or seeing radio, infrared, ultraviolet, X-ray and gamma radiation or static electric and magnetic fields would be amazing, because it would bring a pice of reality that you know exists, but can’t feel, into your sensorial experience. Seeing things through an instrument or on a book is a matter, experiencing them is a different story.

Or think about the hearing infra- or ultrasounds. To give you an idea of how this isn’t just fancy, but would change the way you live your life, check out this video and this one. A fundamental feature would be the ability to turn off this “new senses”: probably having to process that much information would destroy your daily awareness: screening the information we receive is a fundamental option and skill in this modern word with socials and 24/7 news, imagine if you multiply per 10 the “things” that you see and hear!

I have gone way into what now is science fiction (in 50 years, who knows?), but that I hope that I managed to explain myself. During his undergrad career, a physics major gets to study a wide variety of phenomena that are far beyond human experience or comprehension, it turns out that it can be a little bit overwhelming.

Biohacking: no thanks!
It baffles me that someone may consider “biohacker” as a category in itself and not has a specialization for a medic or a biologist. It seems like for biohackers knowing about their body is a more or less option pice in a broader set of competences, I can’t really understand how naive or stupid one would be to perform himself an implant while not being sure if that thing will last or it will rot, break or leak. I really can’t. But, if they’re doing it to themselves they aren’t exerting their free will without damaging others, so they’re 100% free to do it. The problem arises when they spread the word and advertise what they’ve been doing: in this case they’re crossing an ethical line. A professional implant (which doesn’t still exist because there isn’t demand for it) ad would have to present cautionary lines or words and in case you decide for it there would be a doctor informing you of the risks. For the amateur case there’s nothing of it, potentially it is misinformed and incompetent people “formatting” other misinformed and incompetent people. There you’re breaking the point were you’re exiting from what concerns you’re personal freedom only and entering what concerns the collective.

Still Lepht Anonym intrigues me. I’m curious to hear you all back, have a good day.
Davide

[Davide]

#3544

Hello guys,
thank you @marcopastore for the new topics!

Two words on peer review
Before beginning the discussion, I’d like to point out that if a pice of science hasn’t gone through the peer review process, it has no validity from a scientific point of view. Still, the ethical implications of Jiankui’s work are enormous and real. If you’ve never heard about peer review, let me explain!

Doing basic research is an incredibly though process and scientists are often dealing with situations which are not at all humanly understandable. Years of expertise are often required to get hold of a topic and all you can get out is approximate and condensed knowledge: it may surprise you, but in real situations exact solutions are almost never found and one has to deal with many interrelated factors. Add in the mist of this instruments that aren’t at all the plug and play, “monkey proof” tools that we use in our everyday work and you may begin to get an idea of how complex basic research is.

The main problems are two:
1. you have to deal with situations in which intuition and instincts don’t work. Think for example a physic major working on General Relativity or Quantum Field Theory, which go far beyond our limited experience of reality. In these situation it is easy to make mistakes because you imagined things to work in a simpler way than the one they really follow.
2. It is surprisingly easy to introduce biases in data or in the subsequent analysis, either willingly or unwillingly. As a consequence, one should follow the most rigorous, objective methods of analysis. A good example is Particle Physics, which throughout the years has developed one of the strictest operating standards.

Only the experts have the competences required to asses if a study has been held in a correct way, with the correct hypothesis, tools and methods. A person from another field may be able to get a more or less accurate opinion, but it is only that: a personal opinion. Moreover, not only Jiankui’s hasn’t got scientific validity because it hasn’t gone through peer review, but also because from what we know the methods he used are questionable: see this article for an explanation.

The ethics
In an ideal situation where there’s certainty of the absence of negative outcomes, I’d be 100% positive on human genoma modification to tackle diseases or malformations. Saving child from being HIV-positive, from a genetic malformation of the eye, back, hearth could improve massively our society’s wellness. The hearth of the matter lies, in my opinion, in the two questions “what if things go wrong?” and “is biohacking socially acceptable?”.

I am pretty sure that today forecasting what will happen 30 years after a genome modification to the patients and his/her sons/daughters is unrealistic and it will be so for the next decades. I’m not sure that this is possible with any sort of technology, there might be too many entangled variables for us to be able to see at the end of the tunnel. What if the first patient is health, but future generations get increasingly sicker? We might find ourselves with groups of people who are dependent on genome hacking for their well being.

The greatest risk, to me, is that of social imbalances if biohacking becomes feasible and legal: richer, well connected people will get access on the technology way before the others and might give their offspring an enormous head start. Benanti’s reasoning is sound and he has good points on his side, this biohacking phenomena might bring us to a very unjust society divided in “superhuman” and “common humans”: the topic is present also in the debate around the ethical implications of processors, memories and other computer hardware inside a human. Furthermore, we have to be super careful in what we desire, as a naive genetic wish may have unintended consequences years later.

I struggle to take biohacking seriously, today, as the characteristics that parents may want to improve in their children are more or less the same (in a healthy, normal baby, that needs a little “extra juice” to become extraordinary): better aging, more good-looking, smarter, stronger, resistant to certain diseases. I am pretty sure anything else than changing hair color requires the alteration of a plethora of genes, which is much more difficult technically, but also might be impossible to do without serious consequences.

P.S. Even with this strict standards on publications, scientific studies are often in error, one of the main causes is the “publish or die” phenomenon. If using these methods errors are frequent, imagine how low a success rate we would get with more approximate, “intuitive” methods!

Have a good day, cheers!
Davide

[Davide]

#3521

Hello everyone,

thank you @francescatomasello for the articles you shared. It’s the second time you post a work from McKinsey and I’ll start to check them out regularly, they make really interesting analysis and are able to explain and report very effectively. I also didn’t know about UN’s SD objectives, its awesome to see organized effort in this direction. In the two articles you shared two applications stuck me particularly: the first is the use of satellite data to understand which roads are safe, combined with software to map out optimal routes. The second is the Rainforest Connection, they use old smartphones, combined with a microphone and solar cells to listen to the sounds of the rainforest. Audio streams are analyzed in real time to listen to chainsaw and other telltale noises in a very sensible way and detect illegal logging and preaching. What’s amazing about them is the fact that they used simple, already available tech: at a point people begun sending them their old smartphones for the common good!

ChatterPal looks promising, I see that some companies are already using something similar, but less sophisticated, like a chat bot to do the job. Good luck to them, they’ll need as I think that they’re really not the only ones that have had the idea!

@gianlucabelloni I’m positive about the compliance of the autonomous cars with the public authorities vehicles. While someone may not like the concept with what regards the police, think about its applications with ambulances or firefighter vehicles: in a fully autonomous word, they could go at full speed in a safer, more informed way. I also envision a way for you to say, even as a common civilian, “please, let me pass, a person close to me has had an accident” and avoid traffic. (With some sort of validation to prevent abuse of the feature)

Have an awesome weekend,
Davide 

[Davide]

#3513

Hello everyone,

love to see updates from Elon Musk! While he certainly knows his business, I agree with @gianlucabelloni: he will probably have to correct himself to a more realistic timeline. The conventional time span for level 5 autonomous cars to arrive into the market is nearly 10 years in all the declarations and analysis that I’ve read. Cutting that down isn’t impossible, but considering that the task of making the AI work in situations with complex signals, road turns, traffic, pedestrians like in a city centre or where the horizontal signals cross themselves is scary difficult I’m cautious. Still, good luck to him and to Tesla! He has made the world a better place.

@serenavineis I’d love to see more sensibility towards ocean pollution and cleaning. Luckily in these years startups like The Ocean Cleanup (I LOVE them),  OceanPlasticBracelets and 4ocean are growing both in numbers and efficiency. For what I understand, the importance of the last two is mainly in the sensibilization they do, while The Ocean Cleanup promises the most significant garbage collection. Also their idea and the way the are pursuing and developing it looks sound and rigorous to me. If I weren’t a student, I’d make a donation to all of them and cover my girlfriend with ocean saving bracelets! Though I have a feeling that she would prefer Swarosky…

It’s sad to see that some people are still going in the opposite direction: Iceland has recently lifted the ban on whale hunting and will resume the slaughter soon… 😩

Have a good evening/night, cheers!
Davide

[Davide]

#3478

Hello everyone! You’ve all been very active on the forum, wow!

I’ve been very busy with the uni, but thankfully now I have more free time. I’d like to play the black sheep and stand for the opposite view for the the huge space mirror. I think that it’s a very sound, environmentally friendly and smart solution, and that the problems outlined by you all will be solved. Let me explain:

as far as i can think now, the smartest design would be modular, that is the main mirror is made up by thousands of smaller mirrors, which would look like a bee’s eye (but convex). In this way, each sub-mirror could be rotated independently by the others, allowing to fine tune both the amount of light reflected and the focus and illuminated area. The accuracy of the pointing system wouldn’t be, in my opinion, an impossibile technical issue, as current state-of-the-art scientific telescopes from NASA and other agencies have awesome accuracy. The only problem would only be controlling an enormous system and not a small satellite: then, maybe, the best route would be that to make the sub mirrors detached from each other, connected to a main alignment system. Finally, if it is accurate enough to be pointed only at cities, without bleeds in the surroundings, I am absolutely positive about the project.

About the Galaxy Fold
I’m happy to finally see some paradigm shift in the smartphone industry, that until now has essentially produced bigger, more powerful versions of the first smartphones. The recent stagnation of the smartphone market has pushed all producers to push prices upwards and to implement more technology in order to justify those increases.The future is bright for us customers!

About Car Lights During Daytime

@valentina, although the numbers you cite are very realistic, the news itself feels like conspiracism to me: I often find that daytime lights are a must for visibility in some situations, like when looking into mirrors, or transitioning from a bright to dark area, especially for black or gray cars. What leaves me baffled is that with the advent of LED lights some car manufacturers, instead of keeping the same luminosity and lowering power conception, seem to have kept the same power, resulting in brighter lights, both during daytime and nighttime. You can see what I mean with the new Clio’s LED daylight, which manage to disturb me even at noon. I’d light to see more systems like Opel’s IntelliLux around. It basically detects cars in front of you, and changes the shape and direction of the headlights accordingly. Wonderful!

 

@danielafiorellino thank you for you’re article on the differences in the privacy concept between West and China. Now I understand how can it be that Chinese people accept such a harsh (for us) invasion of privacy. Well then, if for them it’s fine, it is fine also for me, provided that they don’t export the model 😂.

@jessinthebox96, you’re right, the Filter Chamber effect should be a primary concern for such an app. If I where to design it, I would constantly keep in mind that, trying to avoid it: there can be no debate if you don’t confront with the opposite opinion. So, there could be a box, or a specific section, in which the views opposite to yours are presented, even if I feel that people would tend to skip these, or that there’s a risk that they would feel manipulated if the thing isn’t done smoothly enough.

Cheers,
Davide

[Davide]

#3455

Good morning everyone,

@peppuz, thank you for the very interesting article on FR. This semester I’m enrolling in a Machine Learning course, and Data Science in general is fundamental in my field, so the website you linked is gold for me, I hadn’t heard about it before! Also the website you linked that generates artificial human faces is huuuuge. I’d never thought that something like this could be possible, I’m half amazed, half scared. I think that the AI needs more refinement before it is perfect, sometimes it generates demoniac creatures 😂:

@valentina we can open a really big debate here on functional illiteracy. The article you share is really interesting and has forced me to change my opinion. I’d always liked to think that functional illiteracy is really a set-in-stone-trait: some people are smart, some people are stupid; but this is really an oversimplification. First of all, many forms of intelligence exist, and I really have to admit that it’s far more realistic that its the daily cognitive effort of studying, problem solving and understanding other people’s views that creates the skill of “critical thinking”.

A thing that I really can’t stand about functional illiterate people is the strength with which they uphold their opinions. The game here its really a Dunning–Kruger effect, but the problem is the combination of high democratic social exposure via the social media, and the fact that, humanly, we perceive as correct the person that’s most confident in him/herself and his/her opinion, giving far lower credit to his/her titles and past experience.

Especially for functional illiterates, I think that society as a whole needs a widespread political debate app. I mean one in which news are properly rated as true or fake, numbers, percentages and figures are objective and people with more declared competence have more visibility. Also, counterintuitive and long term should be immediately explained, to push people to go through the first impression. In this way it should be harder to manipulate people by saying what they want to hear and we all should be safer from populism and short-tightness. What do you think?

To show you how widespread the Dunning-Kruger effect is, here’s quote from the Forbes article I linked above:
“And it’s not just college kids; you can find examples of the Dunning-Kruger Effect everywhere. One study of high-tech firms discovered that 32-42% of software engineers rated their skills as being in the top 5% of their companies. A nationwide survey found that 21% of Americans believe that it’s ‘very likely’ or ‘fairly likely’ that they’ll become millionaires within the next 10 years. Drivers consistently rate themselves above average. Medical technicians overestimate their knowledge in real-world lab procedures. In a classic study of faculty at the University of Nebraska, 68% rated themselves in the top 25% for teaching ability, and more than 90% rated themselves above average (which I’m sure you’ll notice is mathematically impossible).”

Still I’m confident that I’m in the top 25% skilled drivers 😏, cheers!
Davide

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.
• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.

[Davide]

#3451

Hi everyone,

@danielafiorellino, those videos are amazing! They explain the ethical problems in driverless cars extremely well in such a short amount of time! It is both fun and worrying hearing that while society wants driverless cars to favor the overall life count, everyone wants to have a self preserving car. Its sad, but people aren’t politically correct and, even if I knew it’s much safer, if I were to sit in an autonomous car that could sacrifice me for the common good, I would feel like…. betrayed.

@francescatomasello what you linked here is a really good project, love to see such an interest from Intesa San Paolo. Although it’s not what this is about, I’d really love to see more government spending for our cultural and artistic heritage preservation, I wonder if technology could help here…

Cheers,
Davide

[Davide]

#3436

Good morning everyone,

@jessinthebox96 I think that there’s a different concept behind the Moral Machine test than the one you have understood. For how safe and intercommunicating self driving cars will be, nobody can ever grant that you have 0% chance of stumbling into a situation with unavoidable deaths. Take this example: in 10 years time, you’ve bought yourself the latest self driving car model, while I’m more ecological and chose to rock on a bicycle. We are in an empty intersection and you’re incoming with the green light on, the car is slightly slowing down for safety reasons, but still it isn’t going to stop, as it is its right to do so. I’m in the right lane, hidden from your sight by a building an a bus stop and I fail to see the red light, so I cross the intersection a moment before you’re passing.

The car isn’t aware of my presence until I come into the intersection, and it couldn’t be otherwise: to make cars aware of pedestrians and other non-connected humans there are essentially three ways:
1. they’re inside another car’s field of view and it warn the others that there’s a person in that position;
2. there are sensors around, or we use CC cameras;
3. the person brings with him/herself a smartphone which uses an app which communicates to the cars around.
The first is already in study, but if there are no cars around other than yours, your car can’t receive information by this channel. The second is possible, but would be a privacy nightmare and probably would never be implemented. (And there would be really expensive, as we would have to use FR software on every camera on Earth, along with equipping them with antennas to communicate wirelessly). The third is perfectly doable, but has a “hole”: in absence of the other two, if I don’t use the other two channel, if I didn’t install the app, or if I forgot the smartphone at home, your car would be completely unaware of me until I’m right in front of her.

As I hope to have persuaded you of, for how much advanced the technology is, it will always have loopholes and blindnesses. In this situation, the fault would be mine, but still it would be a perfect Moral Machine example: at this point, the car has to choose between running over me, or deviating and running the risk of killing you. What does it have to chose?

About Turism 4.0
@francescatomasello I hadn’t heard of BIT, it does look interesting. It is not my sector at all, but I love traveling and this is a field that was really revolutionized by the digital. Just last  Sunday I booked a holiday abroad with my girlfriend and that night I was talking with parents of how much this world has changed from their good old days. Nowadays all you need to plan a successful holiday is an internet connection, a cup of coffee and an afternoon of dedication. You have websites that search for offers in you place, flights have never been cheaper, you can get an idea of how interesting and exiting a place is just with a quick Google Ecosia search.

This is a massive improvement from 10, 20 years ago when you had to rely on travel agencies, previous knowledge or simply a lot of paper, calls and patience to plan a travel.

@francescatomasello I wonder through how beneficial this information is to the professional people in the sector. Sure, you can get much more visibility and you have much more efficient means to manage bookings and customer communications, but you’re exposed to an unprecedented competition. What’s your take on this?

About Telegram and Privacy

@peppuz I have always thought that Whatsapp end-to-end encryption was unbreakable in practice, while the one used by Telegram is less secure. I had read that this is the reason why only Telegram had problems with the Russian government: Whatsapp can’t give the cryptographic keys because they don’t have them. Every user has them. Where am I wrong?

 

Sorry for the long post and have a good day,
Davide

 

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.

[Davide]

#3428

Good morning everyone,

@serenavineis you’ve really had a multi million $$ idea here. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) such a robot won’t exist for at least ten years, enough time for a hypothetical patent to expire. But this could really be a business for the next generation of workers: ideally, you could use the same robot to test the impact of your ad on all kinds of different audiences: white collars, low and high education people, more religious, less religious, … ; you get the idea.

@danielafiorellino I think that there should be a point where the society shouldn’t intervene and everything should be left to the judgement of the individual. As Igor’s father says, “Il web è uno strumento non-bilaterale, voi, noi riceviamo informazioni ma senza un confronto diretto e dialettico con altri come succede in un gruppo. Dal web traiamo informazioni, idee e concetti che passano a senso unico e spesso chi le riceve, in quel momento, è solo e le elabora a modo suo, senza avere accesso ad altri punti di vista.“; which brings up the notion that in today’s digital society the ability of critical thinking on a new or trend is fundamental. Apart from Igor, who was still a boy, we had many examples of adult, mature people doing similar things, like imitating Drake’s dance as @serenavineis said.

This type of content shouldn’t be censored: it serves as an example which teaches how on easily you can be mislead on the web, and that ignorance, falsehood and stupidity are present here as everywhere else. It teaches you to always ask yourself “should I follow or not?“. I remember that once I read that “we don’t really learn until we have had our nose bleed at least two times, or seen somebody else do it.”

Have a good week,
Davide

 

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.

[Davide]

#3419

@valentinatomasello thank you for the link! Now I understand what @peppuz meant with “Moral Machine”. What you linked is a really interesting test, and as you all already said it’s important that car producers are aware of the issue.If autonomous cars will ever reach the levels of safety we dream today it will irrelevant in practice, as the overall number of deaths would decrease significantly, but morally it is of fundamental importance. I imagine that it is important for the legal aspects as well: it is customary to search for a guilty part to blame when tragedies occur, it’s human nature, and in such cases a car company really would want to prove that there are unavoidable fatal situations and that they are handled has best as possible.

I took the test and here’s my score:
 

The most striking result is the Upholding the Law one: I didn’t feel like rules were so important to me, only in equally weighted situation were red crossing was the only factor, I favored the passengers. Also, it may be politically incorrect, but if it was the only uneven factor I purposely favored social value: it isn’t fair, particularly because one own’s job, social position, altruism, etc…, are deeply influenced by his or her past history, but with the info given that’s the best choice I can make.

@francescatomasello and @serenavineis, you were puzzled by how could the hypothetical self driving car recognize a green traffic light, tell a young girl from an old man, and so on. That’s a major technological challenge and, as far as I know, currently cars are able to recognize a traffic lights, if they are directed towards them. Anything else is science fiction. But this doesn’t matter in the moral problem: they detached the technology from the moral: just assume that the car can, and tell us what it should do.

@danielafiorellino, the ads you link are exactly what @serenavineis and I are scared of. I assume you are too, as you call the article “scary”. The coffee one is ingenious and funny, but also potentially creepy. What if next time, instead of giving it for free, the machine would offer to sell it?

Aside from the privacy issues, I see another overlooked point: the invasiveness that such ads would have: we already have an urban environment that’s oversaturated with ads, adding FR would increase the bombardment. I just realized that this is one of the may reasons why small towns are more relaxing: you’re free to walk, minding your own business, without having a screen forcing you to think about a product you don’t really need.

@francescatomasello the self aware robot is really nuts! Love it! Hadn’t heard of it, thank you for sharing it. What I like most of it, and of the whole AI thing, is that while teaching computers how to think, we learn more about ourselves, we discover that our mind is more complex than we though, like in the post @peppuz wrote that said how unconscious actions are often incredibly convoluted, and still we perform without perceivable effort.

Have a good day,
Davide

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.
• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.

[Davide]

#3406

Hello everyone;
today I’m writing to give you an update to a news I posted about a week ago. It is about the open letters wrote by an aggregation of activist associations to major tech companies to ask them not to sell their FR algorithms to governments. It appears that Microsoft, or at least a part of it, disagrees on the balance between advantages and disadvantages of it, placing the company in a middle ground between Google and Amazon’s positions.

I remain skeptic, but you can’t deny that Smith has a point here. What do you think?

@peppuz, loved the Subito.it part. Apparently studying computer science has many practical advantages 😆. I’d like to know a little about the technical details (if possible), how did you manage to do it? Also your clarification on the difference between automation and AI is fundamental and I’m starting to doubt whatever the autonomous flying system for the drones developed by ZIpline is a valid example of AI. I really didn’t catch the moralmachine.link part of your post, through.

Have a good week,
Davide Toniolo

[Davide]

#3401

Good afternoon everybody,

@francescatomasello and @danielafiorellino I agree with you on facial recognition in airports. The competent government agencies, like CBS for the US, already have you name associated with a clear, high quality picture of yours through your passport. That happens any time you visit a foreign country, or leave our beloved Italy. Implementing FR wouldn’t change much the situation. What really should happen is that the technology, by law, should be restricted to very specific and recognizable points and mustn’t be allowed to expand to Closed Circuit Cameras systems, with whom a complete real time tracking of the traveller would be possible. I also hope to see in development a complete legislation on FR, stating clearly where it can be used and where it can’t, and tech-savvy lawyers like @valentina could really help here. (It looks like that law is one of the old sector that, luckily, won’t know crises in the next decades..).

@serenavineis I also pray that an emotion-reading FR algorithm like the one you shared with us will be banned by the law, in any sector. Marketing has been more and more influenced by psychology in the latest years, giving the possibility to an advertising algorithm to know your emotions and adapt the ads in real time would have, in my opinion, too much power and leverage over an individual. In other contexts, if a company knows exactly the feelings of its clients when they use their products, it becomes easier to engineer things to be addictive (as for example has been done with fb and instagram).

I know that such a technology is fundamental in, for example, robots that can interact in a human way with us, but I see to much potential for misuse here. A company that doesn’t put people first in its priority list could program such robots to really manipulate emotionally weaker people (e.g. with robots for elder’s care). Am I being too pessimistic? Could we allow for Emotion FR and punish misuse with proper laws? Is it really possible to define misuse?

I’m posing this problem because as far as I know, after the news that fb and instagram were thought specifically to be addictive, no official lawsuit began. How can we accept such manipulating behaviors to exist?

About “I Furbetti del Cartellino”
@valentina, although I understand you concerns about privacy, I really think that the problem we all have with the inefficiency, unproductively and bad employees behavior in our public administration is much greater than privacy issue, and we should be anxious to see it implemented throughout Italy. Sorry to say that I’m unable to access your link at ilfattoquotidiano (removing the spaces, obviously), maybe it is broken?

Have an awesome weekend,
Davide Toniolo

 

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Davide.

[Davide]

#3386

Thank you @marcopastore, I had forgot that part, and welcome to @peppuz. It’s nice to have an IT and AI expert added in this forum.

I’d never thought about the 10yearschallenge in this way, but you’re right, if it was social engineering that was wonderfully thought out. As for Google, I find that Youtube and Android are their most difficult to renounce to services.

As for the Trenitalia issue brought out by @marcopastore, I don’t really see them implementing such a technology ever. In 2019, they’ve still troubles making a simple NFC reader work, and can’t get a train delivered in time. I follow a Youtube travel channel (still G, ah!) that once made a series on Sri Lanka. Their trains are literally better kept than ours. Aside from the Alta Velocità, the Italian train system is at the level of a third word country. Until the public opinion gets more concerned with public transport and we begin to make investments in the train system, I have little hope of seeing Trenitalia work.

In the midst of all this (justified) pessimism on AI, I’d like to show you a positive application: a company named Zipline used AI to develop a fleet of autonomous flying drones, that they use do deliver urgent medicals with short shelf life in areas difficult to reach by traditional ground travel. They’ve applied the system with huge success in Rwanda since 2016, but I believe that this is only an initial playground. Here‘s the video.

What I like about their system is that AI is just an element in the engineering challenge, as for example the way they have assembled the planes, or how they solved the take off and landing problem are just as amazing as the autonomous mini-planes.

Cheers,
Davide Toniolo

[Author]

Posts