In a New York Times article, journalist Jack Hitt discusses the effects that criminalizing abortion has had on El Salvador. The article is not only nicely written it slowly brings you in to a country that's catholic beliefs are putting women in prison for up to 30 years should they have, or participate in, an abortion. I actually read the first paragraph twice because I was so astonished by the setting for the article. The article spans out over 9 web pages and you need to register with the New York Times site to read it. The New York Times is however a valuable source of content and like this article it is well worth registering with the site. Registration is free by the way...
The article was an eye opener for me. Learning that South Dakota and soon Mississippi uphold anti-abortion laws that only accept cases where the life of the mother is at risk excluding pregnancy due to rape and incest was astonishing. In El Salvador however there are no exceptions !
The effects described are not what you would have expected and it's not a simple black and white "criminalizing abortion is good or bad". Events demonstrate that leaving no choice is a source of the up most psychological turmoil for the women confronted with the issue.
One point in the article that I found interesting is the question of who is prosecuted. Parties upholding the criminalization of abortion seem to find it difficult to say they will prosecute the women aborting, preferring to indicate that the people organising abortions are the real culprits without really clarifying anything else. Women do seem to be treated as criminals though during most investigations described.
It just shows how events can be extremely difficult and take time to get over in one country and will destroy your life as you know it in another.
I question the reliability and accuracy of Generative AI (GenAI) in enterprise scenarios, particularly when faced with adversarial questions, highlighting that current Large Language Models (LLMs) may be data-rich but lack in reasoning and causality. I would call for a more balanced approach to AI adoption in cases of assisting users, requiring supervision, and the need for better LLM models that can be trusted, learn, and reason.
I discuss my experience with chatbots, contrasting older rules-based systems with newer GenAI (General Artificial Intelligence) chatbots. We cannot dismiss the creative capabilities of GenAI-based chatbots, but these systems lack reliability, especially in customer-facing applications, and improvements in the way AI is structured could lead to a "software renaissance," potentially reducing society's technical debt.
The article discusses the contrasting debate on how AI safety is and should be managed, its impact on technical debt, and its societal implications.
It notes the Center for AI Safety's call for a worldwide focus on the risks of AI, and Meredith Whittaker's criticism that such warnings preserve the status quo, strengthening tech giants' dominance. The piece also highlights AI's potential to decrease societal and technical debt by making software production cheaper, simpler, and resulting in far more innovation. It provides examples of cost-effective open-source models that perform well and emphasizes the rapid pace of AI innovation. Last, the article emphasises the need for adaptive legislation to match the pace of AI innovation, empowering suitable government entities for oversight, defining appropriate scopes for legislation and regulation, addressing ethical issues and biases in AI, and promoting public engagement in AI regulatory decisions.
Japan has made its ruling on the situation between Content creators and Businesses. Japanese companies that use AI have the freedom to use content for training purposes without the burden of copyright laws. This news about the copyright laws in Japan reported over at Technomancers is seen as Businesses: 1 / Content Creators: 0 The […]