Tunneling Through Alternative Facts:The Qwand Problem Space Machine

The Post-Truth Age is characterized by an information multiverse where truths are multiple and simultaneously manifest. Post-truth appeals to emotions and personal beliefs, and is often based on alternative facts. Truth, instead, sits at the center of scientific endeavor, which is based on observable and measurable evidence. Design is less concerned with truth than science and it is at ease with deception, misdirection and magic as it is with facts. In other words, design tunnels through science and belief. This paper reports on the design of the Qwand, a Quantum Wand, that invokes the parallel exploration of all the possible truths of a given problem space

How to describe and evaluate “deception” phenomena: recasting the metaphysics, ethics, and politics of ICTs in terms of magic and performance and taking a relational and narrative turn

open access articleContemporary ICTs such as speaking machines and computer games tend to create illusions. Is this ethically problematic? Is it deception? And what kind of “reality” do we presuppose when we talk about illusion in this context? Inspired by work on similarities between ICT design and the art of magic and illusion, responding to literature on deception in robot ethics and related fields, and briefly considering the issue in the context of the history of machines, this paper discusses these questions through the lens of stage magic and illusionism, with the aim of reframing the very question of deception. It investigates if we can take a more positive or at least morally neutral view of magic, illusion, and performance, while still being able to understand and criticize the relevant phenomena, and if we can describe and evaluate these phenomena without recourse to the term “deception” at all. This leads the paper into a discussion about metaphysics and into taking a relational and narrative turn. Replying to Tognazzini, the paper identifies and analyses two metaphysical positions: a narrative and performative non-dualist position is articulated in response to what is taken to be a dualist, in particular Platonic, approach to “deception” phenomena. The latter is critically discussed and replaced by a performative and relational approach which avoids a distant “view from nowhere” metaphysics and brings us back to the phenomena and experience in the performance relation. The paper also reflects on the ethical and political implications of the two positions: for the responsibility of ICT designers and users, which are seen as co-responsible magicians or co-performers, and for the responsibility of those who influence the social structures that shape who has (more) power to deceive or to let others perform

Counterplanning Deceptions to Foil Cyber-Attack Plans

Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Workshop in Information Assurance, West Point, NY, June 2003Tactics involving deception are important in military strategies. We have been exploring deliberate deception in defensive tactics by information systems under cyber-attack as during information warfare. We have developed a tool to systematically "counterplan" or find ways to foil a particular attack plan. Our approach is to first find all possible atomic "ploys" that can interfere with the plan. Ploys are simple deceits the operating system can do such as lying about the status of a file. We analyze ploys as to the degree of difficulty they cause to the plan wherever they can be applied. We then formulate a "counterplan" by selecting the most cost-effective set of ploys and assign appropriate presentation methods for them, taking into account the likelihood that, if we are not careful, the attacker will realize they are being deceived and will terminate our game with them. The counterplan can be effected by a modified operating system. We have implemented our counterplanner in a tool MECOUNTER that uses multi-agent planning coupled with some novel inference methods to efficiently find a best counterplan. We apply the tool to an example of a rootkit-installation plan and discuss the results.supported by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs and Office for Domestic PreparednessApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited

Inteligência Artificial, Comunicação e Enganação

Este ensaio é a tradução de uma versão revisada e adaptada da introdução do livro Deceitful Media: Artificial Intelligence and Social Life after the Turing Test, de Simone Natale, publicado pela Oxford University Press em 2021. Focando especificamente em inteligências artificiais comunicativas, o livro nos convida a reformular a questão-chave sobre a IA: não o quão inteligentes as máquinas são, mas o quão inteligentes elas parecem ser. O que chamamos de "IA" não é, portanto, uma forma de inteligência, mas sim um reflexo do usuário humano, pois tecnologias como assistentes de voz utilizam a dinâmica da projeção e do estereótipo como meio de alinhamento com nossos hábitos e convenções sociais existentes. Este trecho apresenta os principais argumentos do livro e introduz a noção de "enganação banal", descrevendo mecanismos e práticas enganosas que estão inseridas em tecnologias de comunicação e contribuem para sua integração na vida cotidiana. Também discute a relação entre estudos de comunicação e mídia e IA, além de defender a utilidade de uma perspectiva que enquadra a IA dentro da história e da teoria da mídia.This essay is the translation of a revised and adapted version of the introduction to Simone Natale’s book Deceitful Media: Artificial Intelligence and Social Life after the Turing Test, published by Oxford University Press in 2021. Focusing specifically on communicative AIs, the book invites us to reformulate the key question about AI: not how intelligent machines are, but how intelligent they appear to be. What we call "AI" is therefore not a form of intelligence but rather a reflection of the human user, as technologies like voice assistants utilize the dynamics of projection and stereotyping as a means for aligning with our existing habits and social conventions. This excerpt presents the key arguments of the book and introduces the notion of “banal deception,” describing deceptive mechanisms and practices that are embedded in media technologies and contribute to their integration into everyday life. It also discusses the relationship between media and communication studies and AI, and argues for the usefulness of a perspective that frames AI within media theory and history

Misdirection – Magic, Psychology and its application

The art of magic relies on deception and illusions to create human experiences that appear impossible. Misdirection lies at the heart of this deceptive art, and yet there is little consensus as to what this concept aims to describe. The concept of misdirection is not limited to magic, and its principles are applied to wide aspects of our lives (e.g., politics, public health, marketing). In recent years, scientists have started to examine the psychological mechanisms that underpin misdirection and new theoretical frameworks have been developed to help understand the concept itself. This paper provides two different perspectives on misdirection. In the first section we will discuss its use in magic and examine some of the key features involved in using misdirection to create magical illusions. This section will examine some common misconceptions of misdirection. The second section will provide a psychological perspective that discusses the key psychological mechanisms that are involved in misdirection (perception, memory, reasoning). The third section examines the uses of misdirection in other domains. This paper aims to provide a clearer understanding of how misdirection is used in magic which can serve as the basis for its use in other domains, such as public health

Dynamic magical environments : engaging interaction based on the art of illusion

Thesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Program in Media Arts & Sciences, 1995.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 58-61).by Ishantha Joseph Lokuge.M.S

Plan de comunicación de una app: Signo

[ES] Prácticamente a diario aparece una noticia o una publicación viral en redes sociales denunciando una agresión contra un colectivo desfavorecido. Asociaciones feministas y de víctimas contra el maltrato tratan de dar voz al número incesante de agresiones que parece no tener fin. Y es con el propósito de ayudar a aportar visibilidad sobre estas agresiones que nace la aplicación móvil signo. El presente TFG se centra en el proceso de creación de la aplicación móvil y su posterior estrategia de comunicación. Se pretende así cubrir la totalidad del proyecto, un proyecto real, enfocado a modo de auto aprendizaje pero con el fin de cumplir el propósito de la app: acabar con la violencia callejera.[EN] Almost every day a news item or a viral publication appears on social media denouncing an attack against a disadvantaged group. Feminist and victims' associations against abuse try to give voice to the incessant number of assaults that seems to have no end. And it is with the purpose of helping to provide visibility on these aggressions that the mobile application signo was born. This TFG focuses on the process of creating the mobile application and its subsequent communication strategy. It is thus intended to cover the entire project, a real project, focused as a self-learning but in order to fulfill the purpose of the application: to end street violence.Font Sanchís, D. (2021). Plan de comunicación de una app: Signo. Universitat Politècnica de València. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/175647TFG

You Belong Here: An \u27Interpellative\u27 Approach to Usability

Given the participatory, immersive Web 2.0 culture that characterizes digital experiences today, what is traditionally understood as \u27usability\u27 is insufficient to drive the engagement Web 2.0 audiences both crave and have come to expect from best-in-class interfaces. Thus, this dissertation presents a \u27constructivist\u27 vision of usability that helps designers \u27speak\u27 to audiences who demand excellence, and who will leave when confronted with mediocrity. The constructivist practice of usability occurs through what I call \u27interpellative design.\u27 Interpellative design is both a complement to, and a critique of, \u27accommodationist\u27 approaches to usability (Howard, 2010a) which tend to be associated with technical problem solving (Jordan, 2001), ease of use (Shedroff, 2001), and \u27expedient\u27 solutions (Katz, 1992) to mechanistic problems. As part of the under-theorized \u27constructivist\u27 approach to usability (Howard, 2010a), interpellative design allows usability to remain a \u27problem-solving discipline\u27 (Jordan, 2001); however, its focus on beauty, argument, and the figural dialogue between designers and users extends the purview of usability into non-algorithmic pursuits. To describe a constructivist approach to usability, I outline a theoretical taxonomy which identifies factors at play in interpellative user interfaces. An \u27interpellative interface\u27 is one which calls out or \u27hails\u27 (Althusser, 1971a) users and indicates that a given interface is a viable \u27place\u27 in which they can exert influence, accomplish tasks, or solve problems. The hail is facilitated through the construction of a habitus and use of social capital (Bourdieu, 1984). Briefly, a habitus is the space into which users are interpellated, and acts and artifacts of social capital are expressions of how they belong in that space. In examining how these factors manifest in digital interfaces, I argue that the constructivist approach to usability enacted through interpellative design enables usability engineers to identify flaws in interfaces that were not apparent before the mechanisms of habitus and social capital were explicated. The lens of interpellative design allows usability engineers to address the constructivist concerns pertaining to emotion, visual communication, and other types of \u27distinctions\u27 (Bourdieu, 1984) that could not be \u27seen\u27 before