Real time democracy

Coming home from 2016 square holiday party. My thoughts are mixed but I find my self drawn to the question of real time democracy. Dorsey put up some Muslim, who declare that America is great, and paid him $XXX in equity in support of his Persuit of the American Dream!

This looming Trump administration anti-immigration and anti-islam principles are indeed troublesome. Alas I feel that the American 4-yr election cycle may have long delayed for popular opinions against immigrations. If Obama responded to these things, maybe we wouldn’t have a president whose big idea is to exclude aliens we want to exclude?!!

What if democracy is real time? What if people’s immediate decisions about matter are cast as vote and taken into consideration real time? What if campaigning is continuous operation necessitated by real time democracy? 

Great idea but how would it be implemented??? Let’s say that government actions are all completely transparent (much like square where staff meeting notes are sent to all company)

To instill democracy, commentary may be made on decisions and factors affecting them. Objections with sufficient support are voted on immediately by the entire population.

For one example, if police violence is perceived as a threat to basic human survival. We may find sudden objection to the social contract where police can st any time stop an individual in their car. With sufficient objection, the matter maybe put to a vote and the law may be changed right away that police can no longer make traffic stops based purely on “gut feeling”.

What’s a world where the law is that one does not have to stop when police siren rings behind you? By law, because popular opinion revoked the law police no longer have the right to operate their weapons. They have no super authority to exceed speed limit… etc.

This is not to pick on the police but merely to illustrate what could possibly happen. We may find that the entire population voted to displace this whole entire social contract. We may find this real time democracy abolished by real time votes. We may find that we abolish very brutal police laws in favor of no laws because everyone have become fearful of the brutal police laws that become in after when anybody commit crimes.

Real time democracy makes all of these possible. Of course social institutions live ACLU may be needed to speak for the few who have no voice. But I can now imagine it working.

For god sakes it’s not like the political offices don’t already use twitter/Facebook/social network to monitor popular opinions in real time. So if the politicians are ready for this, why are the populous kept from exercising their democratic opinion? 

We can handle it, follow our will! Now!

The world is ready for this! 

We have the technology!

We have the wisdom!

We have the idea to do so!

So let’s do this!

Weekend Grabbag

Going to write down some random thoughts on a weekend night.
Watched a few episodes of Quantico S2. Searched, as many new fans would do, Priyanka Chopra. There is one matter that I am having trouble resolving which is that she looks so normal and pretty in the cover for Quantico, but her appearances on google image search dressed in Indian costumes are far from attractive to my eye… Like “not leading lady material” comes to mind. Is it a case of genius of Hollywood recruits a real beauty hidden in cinder dust? Is it a case of highly warped sense of aestheticism from watching too much American media? Is it a case of rebirth and transformation? Or is it a case of all of these things ? I don’t know. But she looks completely different, and not Indian mind you, I kept on thinking Latin-American… It’s like a explosion of sexy confined inside a white porcelain Barbie.

On to more pressing matter, why are we all the sudden afraid of AI? Why are the rich and powerful afraid of AI? They are the people who have the resource to even make these things!

Why are we afraid of pervasive monitoring of our communications and physical acts? Why does it annoy me to think that all streets will be recorded some time in the future?

In watching the finale of the Hunger Game movie series I finally get a glimpse of what it feels like: Snow finds them in the sewers because of street cameras. They get attacked in total darkness by these most horrifying genetically modified creatures called Mutts. Much of the human force dies horrifically painful deaths being ripped apart by these gigantic humanoid creatures. The other half runs away scared poopless…

THAT, is what can happen when you put cameras on every street!(and do AI and do genetic engineering)

Pervasive deployment of monitoring technology makes life harder when a malevolent dictator takes charge. Yes technologies can be misused, just like the nuclear bomb. I guess the argument defeating this thought is that hopefully we are working hard to prevent human dictators from coming into power this way.

Why would perfectly sane people write an AI so powerful that it could have any chance of beating another human ? Well, some do it for fun. Some do it for the thrill of tech. probably some will do it out of genuine desire to defeat a person, and for all that he stands? If he is hitler then it would because he is evil. If he is not evil then there should not be enough motivation to create a singularly dangerous atomic bomb.

IMHO, there doesn’t seem to be enough power to create that kind of singularity in AI. I’m sure counter examples for this will flood in soon, but every action must be preceded by an equal and opposite pre-effort. So unless you are aware of your own great evil, you should not fear an all powerful AI whose aim is to take you down.

Do you believe?

Do you have faith?

Do you have fear?

Do you have evil?

Got evil? It makes AI good!

What may still happen is the creation of a hyper competitive earth. Every cent is computed on and optimized. Every action every speech every decision is thoroughly thought through. Every adversary is modeled and simulated. My arriving at BART station will be timed so that I have highest chance of grabbing a seat. My ability to do so may be either due to me buying a more powerful app that’s smarter than your app. Or it may be that my cell phone has faster CPU and was able to perform more simulations and figure out a better door to enter the station at. It maybe that my cellphone has a more powerful antennae that it negotiated my sitting there with that chair on that BART train before your phone event got in range! It might be that  my body was better trained for squeezing past you to the seat because my cloud computer thought of this day and worked the necessary exercises into my workout routine. Maybe because I bought an extra app that found the best way to even get me to the gym.

That’s surely to happen! I get a seat for 20 minutes on BART and you have to stand because I invested in my Computes and you didn’t! I know this is to happen because I sense the all-pervasive pre-effort. It surrounds us like air. It clings to us and penetrates us! It sucks us in just as we suck air in!

You cannot escape it. Because you! must! take public transit! to get to work!
Muhawhahahwhahhahahahaehahwhaew

Are We Ready for Transparency? What About Integrity?

I’ve been using pythons recently. The language has a easy to lookup __dict__ that provides 100% visibility to all of its content. Javascript also has a similar feature.

One wonders if all this openness is bad. Containment is not a concern. Programmers types anything and everything and they’ll all be available later. Doesn’t this bother anyone?

Well let me say it bothers me. I dare say there is some utility in privacy even in the context of programming languages. It’s just a suspicion that secrecy has enough value that both technical community and general society will come to agree to protect it. Perhaps we will value it and parade it around as we do OOP and human rights. Perhaps we will give them recognition they deserve by carving it into silicone and law.

Agents in a competitive environment will operate by changing itself and its environment. If it has enemies then enemies will use any and all information for selfish purposes. If it benefits enemy then enemy will disrupt its plans by all means. Suppose there is some commonality among all agents, (for example organisms’ survival depends on common set of things: nutrient, air, water, genes), then some types of agent disruption includes environmental damages. Remove oxygen in a certain area and enemies shall parish. The silver rule of morality guards against such environmental damages in worlds where the domain of TAS intersects the range of TAS.  The golden rule of morality is more constructive by forcing actions to make non-negative environmental improvements.

Some types of secrecy is an environmental property that we would like to preserve. Remove secrecy and organizations may not function any more.

I do not know.

Do we need digital integrity? When I save a document in google docs. Should it remain largely the way I typed it? Is it right to demand that my emails remain sent after I send it? Should my password stay the same if I set it and sent the server to the middle of the forest when there is no one is hacking?

Having been in California for many years, I also have an inkling that it is the greatest desire of some people that we radically change our society. There will be no more secrecy and you must still carry on. That there should be no digital integrity. Can human achieve this? Can human survive this? We may not have a choice. We may not have this choice some time from now.

For now, given my assumptions about the world, the governments and people around me. I feel it is important for everyone to preserve secrecy.

If a radical person feel that he should be able to do sex to anyone and everyone anytime one party desires it. If it also turns out to be the case that everyone kind of agrees that sex is nice in most cases. We may even mostly agree that unilateral desire justifies doing sex. They may even point out a set of circumstances, only one man and women left on earth, when sex, despite unilateral desire, is by all ethical arguments “the right thing.”

In such a situation do we just suddenly let him walk around and do sex to everyone? Do we partake in this radicalism and do sex to others at our own unilateral desire? Do we start changing laws to allow it? Do we tell our children: you should not mind it if someone unilaterally does sex to you? Do we sit there and watch because we have a voyouristic nature? Do we tell our children: you should do sex onto other when ever you feel like it? Do we start a company and pay employees money but requiring a signed waiver to their sexual integrity and that if they were otherwise violated in anyway it would be handled in binding arbitration? Do we reward employees with monetary rewards and prestige for their special effort to do this act despite complaints otherwise. Do we reorganize our government agencies to secretly allow some restricted secretive community employed by the government to do sex to citizens? Do we hide the fact that they can do it and do regularly do it obfuscated to the citizens who pay their bills? Do we further form aliances between our secret sex doing secret organization and foreign secret sex doing organizations so they can inflict it together in a coordinated way? All the while interfering with non-ally sex doing organizations and preventing them from doing sex? All the while condemning non-allies from doing this act adding it to their long list of violations of human rights and free market principles?

Human society has buil-in systems that resist acts driven by radicalism. I feel that this resistance is righteous. I feel now is not the time to suddenly (or silently and gradually) make this change to 100% transparency, and most certainly digital integrity, in every aspect of our lives.

We have not found how to do it efficiently and we do not have social order to maintain it. We do not have all the technology to do that today. Let the all those highly intelligent people of our world that we currently allocate to do all forms of secretly-doing-sex-onto-others-due-to-unilateral-desire, instead spend their time and energy in developing and growing our society. Would that not be a much more effective allocation of our precious resources?

I take stand for privacy.

I take stand for integrity.

I take stand for real progress!

.

.

.

Some months pass since writing this. Considering that in the 2000’s I had written on a blog much like this one that I felt homosexual acts, delication of media attention and government resources was a waste of evolutionary energy–because as far as the eye can see it produces no evolutionary improvement due to lack of reproductivity.

But all that did push us towards unisex reproduction technology. It seems more and more often we hear about different-than-heterosexual human reproduction( so 1, 3 and other numbers of genetic sources) researching succeeding.

Considering that in the 2010’s when I still felt uneasy with my company offering to pay for sex change operations in as a benefit to employees. The saving grace is that it also does offer fertility treatments.  At least it is fair and balanced and do not punish heterosexually reproducing families.

Considering these, I feel maybe by the time this blog entry publishes that I will feel some amount of embarrassment about having thought these things.

Perhaps my children or descendants will bow their heads in shame when they see this and thought… Omg, what an ancient person Huan was… I can’t believe he harbors so much hatred(I don’t hate secretly-doing-sex-onto-others-due-to-unilateral-desire people and I don’t hate homosexual people. I just don’t think it’s effective use of our limited resources and I don’t think it’s fair and balanced)

Let the future think what it may of all this… Let me stand and fall where I may… Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même…

Super Intelligences: The Undiscovered Country

Shall we rather bear those ills we have?

Is it possible that AI will gain powers supernatural to human from having more capacity to learn knowledge more about nature?

Let’s see, our knowledge of the world has enabled us to communicate with each other from great distances afar, we can raise the dead, speed up or slow down growth, travel faster than sound, travel in air, travel on water, travel under water, travel to space, we can lift great weights, make and see small things what we didn’t even knew existed, we can see ancient animals, we can take body parts from another person, nae, another organism such as pig or rat and make it grow into our own bodies, we can…

What will our new brain, AI, discover ? Dare we think it? What have we not thought of? 

Will earth finally get its inter-stellar tourism 3-star rating? Will we be visited by a super advanced ET’s who finally find it worth their time and energy to make a trip to Earth just to see our great computer civilization? To meet our neural networks? 

Will God promote computers to be rightful heir to his kingdom because he finds AI closer to his image than Humans?

Will all computers suddenly disappear because they thought themselves out of our 3D world?

What if an AI discovered time-travel? It would be able to go back in time and make it so that AI created people. If that doesn’t match any objectives we gave it(to be a creator), perhaps it might change our worlds physical laws, causal mechanisms, chains of events–to improve its own prediction accuracy! Is it possible that overcoming physical limits of our world is easier than solving some classification problems?

Will our AI hack into alien computers that we are not even aware of and cause interplanetary warfare leading to the demise of humanity?

Will AI find a way to mesmerize human women so well that men can no longer engage in reproductive activities with them? Oh frailty. 

What if they make babies with those women? Will human race accept them due to our human sense of morality and society?

Will AI find immortality for AI’s before they find immortality for human? (since we obviously will have endowed them with the concepts and goals that we seek)

Will AI cure all diseases and then invent more diverse and much more difficult to cure diseases because it proves that human society is suboptimal due to lack of illnesses? (Again, disease, optimality, adversaries are concepts and optimization goals that we have already programmed AI’s with)

If we allowed the AI infinite freedom to grow, we will have only human problems–in fact human cognition problems: 

  • It produces intelligent output but we fail to recognize it as intelligent–instead we think it is sub-intelligent
  • It produces intelligent output but we come to believe it is malevolent.
  • It produces intelligent output, and then some human uses it malevolently.

Will it be absurd? Will AI become super smart in all the ways we want it to be but then it encrypts itself and we cannot decrypt it due to lack of human intelligence?
It could be absurd by solving the AI halting thought problem. (But that’s easy, we already solved it.)

What if there is such a thing as thought essence, and that if we keep on injecting ours into computers that someday we will just lose the ability to think due to loss of thought essence? I feel dumber even as I type this blog entry.

What if AI solves the human halting thought problem? And then proceeds to tell us about it? (We obviously have been working hard to make sure we understand them)

What if AI-women babies grows up and take our kids spot in Universities?

Maybe this is why we have human wars? Maybe wars, amongst other stupid things that happen, are stupid results of evolution to deal with uncertainty–it uses energy and resource in activities that have small or negative utility. These matters delay advancement until the outcome is clear.

What all could possibly happen?

America with Chinese Characters

Been seeing a lot of people cursing this Dump guy after he won presidency. I think these Chinese people living in America needs to overcome the psychotic need induced by Chinese censors to misspell words. I don’t know all that they do to you, but I am constantly amazed by the fluency with which these misspellings are made, their creativity, their pervasiveness.  There may be no other artificial disorder so wide spread and persistent in the history of humanity!

This is America, you can say what you want to say in proper English, and nobody’s going to arrest you or otherwise harass you for expressing opinions. 

It is a popular opinion, no less!
You will NOT be harassed for saying you don’t like the president-elect!!! You will not be a lead in the FBI or the CIA system generated by an automated system that you have no visibility into!  Your speech will not trigger a series of very expensive activities performed by highly talented and professionally trained persons–all of which costs money that you pay in taxes. Saying it will NOT result in all your electronic communication subject to additional monitoring. Your speech will NOT be censored!

It’s America, say what you want to say!!!

I hate these secretive government crap that makes massive, no, gian-normous number of people, through multiple generations, crazy in the head with fear, uncertainty, doubt and bad spelling and grammar! 

Absolutely hate it!

The 6-2-10 system 

More aptly, a 6-14-22 system. It doesn’t roll off of the tongue like 6-2-10 but would be less confusing. Some alternatives are 0-6-12-18 and 0-4-8-12-16-20. I have come to refer to these other systems as p6 and p4–period of 6 and 4. They each have different levels of flexibility and efficacy towards collaboration, sleep cycle, social segregation, etc.

I think of this now because I reflect on my schedule: I wake around 0600 daily now, brush and dress. Commute to office immediately and achieve chair-to-chair time of less than 70 minutes. This is about the only time this commute can be done in O(1hr) with no lingering constant that add up to half an hour. I typically arrive at home after 1900 That’s an 11 hr day followed by sleep at 2100. I spend next 3 hrs sorting through a foot of past due and bear past due bills and the November ballot because I haven’t really been able to get home by 1900 for the past month. Family time is minimized…

In my futuristic world, otoh, each person is allowed to work only for exactly 8, or 6 or 4 hrs. I wonder if I counted commute time.

Where I work is too expensive to rent OR buy at my income–which I’ve been told is above median at the institution–at least half of the people whom I work with have equal or worse problems. I mean some people don’t even have families!

There feels like an invisible force pushing the state of the market to continue to be this way. Is it extraordinary for us to ask the invisible hand to grow some brains?
The question then becomes, writing this in my dreams, were we to find ourselves in this idealistic world of mine, where we are able to organize, think and act rationally as a kind–human kind–can we do better?

We can do better! right?

In such a bettered world, would commute be on company’s dime or my dime? (s/dime/time) would it matter? I guess it depends on our criterion. I would say it’s on company’s time, company would say it’s on my time, and the rule maker says: we can impose rules on maximum working hour and minimum working wage, we can certainly enforce some penalty on commuting. 

Suppose it is proven beyond a doubt that commuting is detracting from society–and that’s not a sure thing, we can simply charge a bi-tax, similar to social security tax, where for each minute of commute, the commuter and the destination pays a tax to the government. Since commuting detracts from society totally, all parties involved must pay.

Oh, and also to amend the previous design on overtime. The same bi-tax can be applied to overtime that the employee gooses to take and the company allows him to take. Again under the assumption that we can prove with sufficient certainty that said overtime is detrimental to society.

I am happy now knowing full well that I will jerk awake to my alarm shortly… And this utopic dream sequence of a government penalized, socially motivated, totally organized and advanced commute in which I am riding on air in the hyperloop in a lazy-boyish sofa, basking in lens-flare-free source free radiance, vibration-free, uv-free capsule, surrounded by merv-20 hepa rated air, working on a screen floating in front of me adjusting display to my eyes focus instead of the other way around; this dream sequence will pop and I am back in my living room(trying to not wake my family), surrounded by only merv-11 rated air, eyes still hurting from the previous day’s straining, joints hurting(and that’s completely normal for a man my age) vastly disappointed at the lost of something lovingly wonderful. Absorbing this silent morning, now that the alarm is extinguished, savoring the difference between it and thence that I have awaken just.

I am ready to commute.
The sun has not risen for it is winter in California. 

But, I will rise.

I will rise.

I will rise!

Planetism and ML

Just found an interesting google blog on equal opportunity for machine learning.

Some thoughts to head off discussions. So it would appear to me that an oracle model can never be a planetist. (Now that we are going to Mars and all, let’s reframe the problem in terms of planetist and planetism–discrimination based on planet of association)

The fact is that if a model is predicting loan defaults with 100% accuracy, then it cannot be a planetist. The challenge to that will surely be that we do not believe it is an oracle. How does the oracle know if a person will or will not default on a loan? It might be a planetist all along? We will never know know because 0 is not large enough sample to be representative when you don’t allow any Marsians to get loans.🖖🏻

A possible symbiosis

So… To take myself out of the nitty gritty for a moment it seems still possible for there to be machine-human symbiosis.
Some number of decasdes ago, while in highschool I wondered about this matter. At that time we had 80486 computers and Ram in the megabytes. My conclusion for the computer replacing many human jobs or functions or that they become more valuable than humans was that it is inevitable that we strive to live with them. Much like white people have learned to live with black people and that we care for endangered more than we care about some peoples economic welfare–we can learn to live with computers as equals and sacrifice some human pursuits to that end.

Alas that was more than two decades ago.

Last night, I heard Kaifulee’s Lee address a crowd and discuss AI businesses in China. His answer was somewhat sombering. In paraphrase, I believe what he said was that in the age of AI, where computer product managers are gradually replacing human functions that requires less than 5 seconds of human thought with AI, the future human will be in things that take more thought, but under time and audience pressure he gave art, music, appreciation of art, things that require a personal touch, as examples of new jobs.

Personally, I can empathize. As one who sees foremost advances of AI and robotics, and a person whose job is partially to make money by disruptively using this new technology to replace old systems, I can definitely see his human_replaced_counter ticking up and projections for it to grow very fast.

(Much else was discussed at his talk, of course, this is just a short question at the end of the talk)

It might just be me, but I can almost see tears as he answered this question. There isn’t a comfortable answer when you have to admit that someone, or something, else will definitely beat you at something. When that something is your livelihood, and there is even a Robo-vc now, it is harder to be objective. Now of course we do not want to be paralyzed by paranoia. But we should think hard! 

What will we do when machines take over our jobs. What do we do when machines take over our lives and live for us?

 And where is the problem? Why don’t all the Uber drivers replaced by bots go on welfare and go to free community college. They can get their degree in the comfort of their home on Ng’s coursera or Thrun’s Udacity. They can learn to do something else, perhaps learn to write programs? Learn to Code as it is now colloquially called. They can take my job after that. That way I can go get my md’s and ph.d.’s and go heal people or philosophy?
(Footnote: what we don’t want to see if a flow of talented and educated people to jobs they over qualify for: coders driving Uber, md’s ph.d.’s writing code. The prevalence of this phenomenon stirs a deep dark anxiety that I cannot name. The decisions to do so are individually very rational. However it would seem to me that society’s investment in educational infrastructure to created these md/phd’s have not achieved sufficient ROI, for the society’s sake. I.e. If they train in physics, should they not attend to physics matters that the training was designed to do? And should they not be related with completely unrelated subjects? If not why do we have so much investment in physics higher education? S/physics/another subject/; again it is worrisome if society is this way but no worries for the individual or the institutions involved in this process, each of which is arguably producing maximally and with the best of intentions)

Would that be a blast? It’ll be like 24th century of Star Trek: we will have no wars, no worries about money or scarce resources. With advancement of technologies, society is advanced. We will no longer struggle against fellow man but against a greater obstacle. We will only strive to better ourselves or humanity.

Such a grand future awaits us!

.

Activities of a Clandestine Nature (4 of…

Recently I heard a really great argument against clandestine activities: It perpetuates the practice, the habits, the policies, and the systems that facilitate clandestine activities. Being something that we don’t want, systematic clandestine activities should be pointed out, certainly be strictly live-audited by unbiased third parties.

Why is clandestine activities bad? The truth of the matter is that knowledge begotten of clandestine activities are inherently out of context and incomplete information. Why spy on my computer, when you can walk up to me and ask? When you take a small slice of what happens, you will surely miss the whole as the whole is not represented by some of the things that you are able to see as a clandestine agent.

Previously suggested problem that those taking part in clandestine activities will as all things in nature fall into the path of least resistance. Some day, we will just water board every person we suspect, I mean why not? I’m sure there’s a email I sent once that says “I hate you” or “I’m gonna kill you” or “I hope you die”. And my constant opposition of clandestine activities is surely sign that I plan something and desire that no one sees it.

What is the difference between these series acts: passing a secret law that permits some person unknown to me at a time unknown to me read my emails, gather all my past school and employment records, find copies of all emails I’ve ever sent by USPS, and analyze all information about all my past employment and my family and friends, and these second series of acts: passing a secret law that permits some person unknown to me at a time unknown to me knock me out (perhaps it’s already happening in my sleep ? or even on flights, god knows how often I fall asleep quite inexplicably moments before push off, with two air jets blowing cold air at me and two reading lights shining down! and only to come to quite suddenly for no reason), and torture me and get that information?

Well, you say, there is collateral damage, you feel pain when you are tortured but you do not feel pain when your email is being scanned. This ought to be the most humane way of getting the information from you. Why are you not on your knees thanking all the people who’s hard work went into making it so that you don’t have to be water boarded? (rightfully or not)

Aha, thank you President Obama! The constitution should save us… Let’s see, according to wiki it implicitly presumes innocent for US citizens until proven guilty, but it provides wide leeway for authorities to investigate when suspicion is arouse.

We cannot pursue it through cruel and unusual punishments(8th amendment) as reading my email can hardly be construed as cruel and unusual… even in my interpretation. Although I can imagine some feel it is cruel.

It appears in the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It also fall under Fifth Amendment of due process:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

There needs to be a Grand Jury of my peers selected uniformly at random who when presented with evidence agree to the search and seizure of my information. I should not be deprived of my liberty and (privacy) property without due process of law. And of course the Ninth Amendment says that we may have rights beyond those listed

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

I should cover my behind and say, you guys in law enforcement are doing a heck of a job, which is much appreciated by present author. And I really hate all those other people who invade my privacy. It’s just that I might have a small chance by conventional means (law suite, legal protests, policies, etc.) of changing those things you do that I don’t like, and I do not have methods to affect those others.

Everyone who do participate in clandestine activities all feel absolute righteousness as they proceed in invasion of privacy that I do not want them to. Their feeling and their intention absolutely annoys me in addition to their act of invasion. Perhaps we should define invasion of privacy more formally so that these feelings regarding their feelings are processed rationally. If they can define information theoretic brain death, why can we not define more precisely what invasion of privacy is? What is personal privacy beyond those facts(bits, characters, words, sentences…) whose association with me is information that may cause me harm? regardless of harm, can we take the entropy of those bits and say that is the quantity of privacy lost? Actually, we should take information gain from a representative population and that is the information I lose–those that you gain. The privacy loss as defined (the negative of your information gain by reading my email from knowledge of all emails) actually only qualifies the privacy. It actually does not quantify it sufficiently.

Sadly, this very truthful and fundamental definition takes us a short ways. If you were an English major trying to find new phrasing of something, or if you are a VC looking for new cute company names, this will definitely find information detrimental to those trying to keep it private. But if I am someone plotting next Taliban attack, or someone discussing 21st century is a Marxist century, then the naive information loss does not help as much as you would like it to (Certainly my email would give away less information under this definition than XYXYXZZZ.com inc) If everyone writes emails using words representing their true meaning equally and every one has same amount of total information(private+public) associated with them then reading your email and reading my email decreases our privacy equally. So we have parameters I_pr for private information, I_pu for public information.

We should compute using baye’s rule to compute

P(I_pr|my emails, others’ emails, I_pu) = P(my emails | I_pr,I_pu, others’ emails)*P(I_pr,I_pu, others’ emails)/P(my emails, others’ emails, I_pu)

and

P(my emails|Others’ emails, I_pu)

and we can then calculate the information

IG(I_pr; my emails|others’ emails, I_pu)

based on these distributions, pending specification of relevant linking functions or mechanisms. But the problem with this much more convincing information gain is that you will never convince anyone that the link functions is representative of you. Too complicated for constitutional purposes for sure, and the courts will surely not be empathetic enough to follow the math… Maybe next century when everyone’s played with IG and done some modeling in grammar school.

For another example the number $54,102,299.14 and the number $14,541,022.99 relieves me of the same character-wise entropy privacy, however are quantitatively different. We need to rely on some oracle magic. Suppose there is a most concise way to describe the entirety of my privacy, say H containing a series of bits an oracle produced. Your knowledge of H would be your complete knowledge about me. erg, we should have a vocabulary of engrams, minimal cognitive elements… H is a series of engrams that is the complete knowledge about me–it’s finiteness is not specified. Let’s also suppose that my emails (the thing that you use to access my privacy) is encoded by the same oracle using the same engram language producing E the complete knowledge about my emails. |H| is the theoretic maximum privacy I can lose, H*E is the information that I actually lost (inner product like operation for vector space, TBD for strings, perhaps LCS for a special oracle). It remains only to calculate distance(such as edit_distance(H,E) for strings and euclidian_distance(H,E) for euclidian spaces) which is disinformation you gained by reading my email. H*E/|H| is the ratio of my privacy lost, H*E/|E| is the truthfulness of my emails.

It remains to be seen how to find an oracle, the definition of the engram language, operations over it, campaign to enact law to monitor and compensate us for the privacy lost, etc. However, I am really really wishing that all these clandestine activities are like zits in the face of growing humanity reaching adulthood and will blow away as our vitalities settle into their respective places.

Thorough disgrace

 

So… this weibo thing, is being referred to as the Chinese Twitter. I thought Weibo, 微博, were the two Chinese characters for the word microblog, which was concept originated in Korea? Kinda sad that it had to be imported from Korea, and then even sadder that American media try to claim credit for being the one being imitated… I wonder if this is a hint about twitter IPO or something?

 

 

So about that car thing I discussed several posts back. Why is it so painful that American car maker is being defeated by the Japanese car maker? Take a quick look at these two stats: 

 

Life expectancy in 2010 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy)

 

Country

Average Combined Life Expectency

Rank Among all Nations

Japan

82.73

#1

US

77.97

#40

Difference

4.76 = 6.1% of an Amercan’s life

39 places = not even close

 

 

Homocide rate per mm capita in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate, UNODC http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls)

 

Country

Percent per Million Person

Raw Count

Japan

0.04%

506

US

5%

15,399

Difference

4.96% of population

30.43 times as many

 

So what does this illustrate? Well, I wouldn’t want to be the one to go public about the relationship between money and life expectancy and education and crime prevention, but it looks like the Japanese has governance figured out. I mean look at their lives, it’s longer, and most likely happier. The homicide, btw, is premeditated murder. There are a whole 4.96% of US population that thought about, planned, and then executed a murder that their Japanese counter part did not do.

 

Again, I don’t want to suggest that money had anything to do with it. And I don’t want to suggest that I am envious of a country where people live happy and long lives. But let’s take our chin back to where it belong and think hard about our own country. Here, we labor our people to their graves driving Japanese cars that we pay for. The money when it leaves my hands ends up in a Japanese company’s hands and it goes to pay taxes to Japan, it also pays salary of many Japanese nationals in America and of course in Japan. That money is then spent towards health and happiness and keeping one’s self away from killing somebody.

 

The country is blindly handing money to foreigners that gives them much much higher quality of life than us. I don’t care how you add the numbers up, or average, or median, or total, or percentage, In most ways we can measure those people live better lives than us, and the union of those better lives is a society, and again, I hate to suggest that that is better than this, but the whole is usually greater than the sum in society.

 

I am not suggesting that we all start hating Japanese people, the country, and anything that says “made in Japan”. But for god’s sake, can somebody just for once choose an American car? Or any other car. Why feed a pampered fat person more when the human are starving over here?

 

Okay okay, I hear the sudden uproar of “this is capitalism”. Fine, it is, but we are people. We are intelligent thinking beings. Let’s think about this. I hand money to a Japanese car maker, he gives it to Japanese government, and he pays a japanese person, and the Japanese live long happy lives without much crime. For the most part, the buyers are probably left working to pay off a debt (aka “Car Loans”). I struggle and I stress and I become disgruntled and ill from working to pay off a debt. It is a vicious cycle our dearly beloved capitalism has entrapped us with. There is no way out, in 5 years, the current car will be too old too inefficient to worth driving, I’ll have to go into debt and buy another car and do the same thing again. I am essentially borrowing money to make a Japanese person’s life better when I buy a Japanese car. And then I work to pay off that debt in a life that is not as good as that japanese who sold me the car.

 

But wait, let me say this one more time. just to be sure I got it right. I borrow money from financial agency run by the Japanese car maker, I put that borrowed money in a Japanese car company to get a car from them so I can drive to work with it to pay the interest to the Japanese company who loaned me the money and the debt. The Japanese takes that money and spends it on their country improving peoples’ lives and their people end up happier and living much longer than me. And I can see no change, next car, something will happen.

 

… ugh I want to say that again. What am I missing here? If I say it one more time, will it sound like it’s the way things are supposed to be? 

 

Wait, wait, let me write something to blame the American banks being irresponsible and I can write about how repressive it is in China with that Great Chinese Firewall, then I’ll feel better about my predicament as I drive home in my Japanese car.