[ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment (& CS techniques - Security and/or Privacy )

[Gary Miller]

Eugen,

It is one thing to reiterate that a thread is dead as a moderator that is
within your rights.

But to reply publicly and in doing so to promote your own viewpoint when you
expect others to not reply 
because the thread has been declared dead by you is in my opinion an abuse
of power.

I realize that you took the moderator position because nobody else wanted
it, and I thank you for that I think, but
I would suggest that you do not put out fires by fanning the flames.

I also think the tone of the reply was rather insulting and would have
expected a better showing from a moderator
representing this group.

Currently this sounds more like censorship and punishment of opposing
viewpoint than moderation.

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 12:58 AM
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: Re: [ExI] free-will, determinism,crime and punishment (& CS
techniques - Security and/or Privacy )

On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 02:15:48AM +0300, Khaled Aly wrote:

> I've been following this since it started. I feel that a murderer 
> should be

That thread has been killed, actually.

> punished to death in the easiest possible way (e.g. lethal injection), 
> once

You don't seem to know much about execution by lethal injection.
Especially, since many are bungled on purpose. Say, have you ever been in
jail? 

In terms of monetary costs, executing people is more expensive than locking
them up for life.

> it is proven for very sure that he/she has done so deliberately and 
> under no

You don't seem to know much about 'proving' anything outside of the realm of
formal system. How do you estimate your error range in knowledge?

> external effects; for two reasons: 1) It is a relief to the victim's 
> family unless they choose otherwise; and 2) If I were to choose, being 
> the

Do you know how clan wars start?

> murderer, I'd rather go now/then than spend 20 years in jail. About 
> therapy,

Since you think that way, everyone else must also think that way. Obviously.

> I think it may work in certain sick cases (there are sick souls that 
> could be treated why not, and there are evil souls that will not 
> change, and there are those whose life circumstances made them go 
> wrong way and they need social rehabilitation - every case is different).

Interesting theories you got going there.
 
> This is my entry to how effective is the overall current justice 
> system. And the ever unresolved question about the tradeoffs between 
> personal privacy and community security. Do any computer or IT people 
> see a role of algorithms helping the justice system to decide (for a 
> start; since

The legal code is already an algorithm by which the society operates (and it
is really code in literal sense of the word). Fortunately, blind Justitia is
executed by agents of flesh and blood, which have common sense (the law is
an ass).

> real-life AI is a bit far ahead). What I mean for example, consider 
> obtaining a search warrant. How difficult is it to write some code 
> that could 'assist' the decision making. First, it will perform 
> preliminary

If people need an expert system to decide such basics you should fire them.

> information analysis. Second, if it's open implementation, it will be 
> possible to a large technical population to review it and ensure it 
> works as intended/declared and for the benefit of justice. And third, 
> within a digital world, it can ensure that a court order of privacy 
> invasion for a suspect individual will actually expire; provided it 
> began, through the use

People make mistakes.

> of digital certificates to be provided and revoked in time by court to 
> law enforcement. The last of course requires that default electronic 
> communication be secured, and be broken only using a court digital

Good idea, in theory, in practice cryptography doesn't work.

> certificate. This can be as frequent as the low issuing entities would 
> decide according to existing situation (exceptional, less exceptional, 
> regular). An innocent whose privacy was broken deserves to be advised 
> about it at some point.
> 
> Beyond this, any computer literate person would confirm that open 
> source code is most reliable because it had been reviewed by the expert
public.

Any code is unreliable, read Bugtraq.

> Same applies to an open source algorithm that is designed to support 
> the justice system deciding what to do with a suspect, a person in 
> trial, or an indicted person and let that be an advisory input for trial.
> 
> Unlike few people may think, computers and human minds don't work the 
> same

O'Rly?

> way. Computers are structured crunching speed machines and minds are 
> pattern learning neural machines. They are complementary (until neural 
> network computing make it to market and yet it will be v. hard to mimic
the brain).
> Why does law enforcement, or as a whole the justice system use 
> computers only for data recording purposes. What about the huge 
> analytic power that

Do you know many LEOs or judges? Do you know much about system security?

> can be made presentable to humans to evaluate and judge. I don't think 
> any final sentence should be produced by a machine with the current 
> state of the

Thank you for that.

> art, or may be never. But speaking preliminary and analytic support, 
> incorporating digital technology can potentially resolve many issues 
> and cases where the society disagrees about how just the outcome was.

I could see whether computer assist would be good in forensics, but in
decision-making, that's ridiculous. By the time it will be useful, there be
computer crime, as in: criminal computers.
 
> Greatest software technologies came out of open source because it is 
> auditable. And that's much like digital democracy. Transparency does 
> not

It is so difficult to build robust electronic voting systems and people are
so ignorant that currently all such attempts need to be banned.

> compromise rule of law -- it rather enhances it. Sadly, digital 
> technology is being consumed for many irrelevant but sellable 
> applications before it is being considered to support a sound social 
> infrastructure. And what's more relevant than justice...
> ka, phd

You have no idea how funny you are.

--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.2/985 - Release Date: 9/2/2007
4:32 PM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.2/985 - Release Date: 9/2/2007
4:32 PM