A Proximate Mechanism for Communities of Agents to Commemorate Long Dead Ancestors

Many human cultures engage in the collective commemoration of dead members of their community. Ancestor veneration and other forms of commemoration may help to reduce social distance within groups, thereby encouraging reciprocity and providing a significant survival advantage. Here we present a simulation in which a prototypical form of ancestor commemoration arises spontaneously among computational agents programmed to have a small number of established human capabilities. Specifically, ancestor commemoration arises among agents that: a) form relationships with each other, b) communicate those relationships to each other, and c) undergo cycles of life and death. By demonstrating that ancestor commemoration could have arisen from the interactions of a small number of simpler behavioural patterns, this simulation may provide insight into the workings of human cultural systems, and ideas about how to study ancestor commemoration among humans.Agent Based Models, Ancestor Commemoration, Dominance Relationships, Communication, Cooperation, Memory

Patents and The Regress of Useful Arts

Patent systems are often justified by an assumption that innovation will be spurred by the prospect of patent protection, leading to the accrual of greater societal benefits than would be possible under non-patent systems. However, little empirical evidence exists to support this assumption. One way to test the hypothesis that a patent system promotes innovation is to simulate the behavior of inventors and competitors experimentally under conditions approximating patent and non-patent systems. Employing a multi-user interactive simulation of patent and non-patent (commons and open source) systems ("PatentSim"), this study compares rates of innovation, productivity, and societal utility. PatentSim uses an abstracted and cumulative model of the invention process, a database of potential innovations, an interactive interface that allows users to invent, patent, or open source these innovations, and a network over which users may interact with one another to license, assign, buy, infringe, and enforce patents. Data generated thus far using PatentSim suggest that a system combining patent and open source protection for inventions (that is, similar to modern patent systems) generates significantly lower rates of innovation (p<0.05), productivity (p<0.001), and societal utility (p<0.002) than does a commons system. These data also indicate that there is no statistical difference in innovation, productivity, or societal utility between a pure patent system and a system combining patent and open source protection. The results of this study are inconsistent with the orthodox justification for patent systems. However, they do accord well with evidence from the increasingly important field of user and open innovation. Simulation games of the patent system could even provide a more effective means of fulfilling the Constitutional mandate "to promote the Progress of . . . useful Arts" than does the orthodox assumption that technological innovation can be encouraged through the prospect of patent protection

If We Could Talk to the Animals, How Should We Discuss Their Legal Rights?

The intricate tapestry of animal communication has long fascinated humanity, with the sophisticated linguistics of cetaceans holding a special place of intrigue due to the cetaceans’ significant brain size and apparent intelligence. This Essay explores the legal implications of the recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine learning and neural networks, that have made significant strides in deciphering sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) communication. We view the ability of a being to communicate as one—but not the only—potential pathway to qualify for legal rights. As such, we investigate the possibility that the ability to communicate should trigger legal rights for beings capable of communicating, whether they be cetaceans or other creatures. As the Cetacean Translation Initiative (CETI) project, which is actively working to unlock sperm whale language, moves closer to enabling meaningful human-cetacean dialogue, we stand on the precipice of a transformative understanding that may compel a radical reevaluation of animal legal rights and, perhaps, human legal rights as well. In fact, viewing eligibility for legal rights through a more objective lens, such as a communication criterion, may even improve our understanding of human legal rights, their origins, extent, application, and even entitlement itself. We begin with an overview of animal communication, emphasizing the complex acoustic patterns of sperm whale songs and clicks, which have been captured and analyzed through the collaborative efforts of marine biologists and computer scientists. This cross-disciplinary effort has yielded what the Dominica Sperm Whale Project has named “Flukebook”—a robust dataset that informs machine-learning models with acoustic signals, contextual behavioral data, genetic data, and geospatial information—that opens the door to the potential of an interspecies large language model (LLM) useful for communication among sperm whales and humans. Having established that the prospect of communicating with another species is becoming increasingly feasible, we then delve into the philosophical and ethical considerations that accompany such a breakthrough. Drawing upon the perspectives of thinkers such as Jeremy Bentham, Professor Peter Singer, and Professor Martha Nussbaum, we investigate the ethical foundations for considering the legal rights of cetaceans, or other nonhuman animals. This investigation is juxtaposed with historical whaling laws and modern legal frameworks, probing the adequacy of current laws, norms, practices, and attitudes regarding emerging interspecies communication. Finally, we propose a novel legal paradigm that contends with the implications of cetacean communication capabilities. As we inch toward potentially understanding requests, preferences, or even rules or laws of sperm whales, the ethical imperative to reexamine their legal standing becomes undeniable. This Essay examines practical legal issues such as jurisdiction, standing, representation, autonomy, and the feasibility of animal citizenship. In fact, it envisions innovative legal constructs such as a “Magna Carta Cetacea” and a “United Species” extension of the United Nations. In addition, we endeavor to articulate an objective standard by which any being capable of the requisite communication qualifies for legal rights. In this potential legal frontier, the communication of preferences by an animal may necessitate that we seriously consider conferring legal rights to those animals. This groundbreaking dialogue could not only elevate the rights of whales, but also provoke a broader discussion about the principles underlying human legal rights themselves, challenging our current anthropocentric legal systems to evolve. As we decode the “codas” of sperm whales, we are challenged to reenvision the legal and normative matrix of life on Earth and our place within it, guided by potential principles such as mutual respect and legal recognition that transcend species boundaries

Fault Lines: An Empirical Legal Study of California Secession

Over the last decade, multiple initiatives have proposed that California should secede from the United States. This article examines the legal aspects of California secession and integrates that analysis with findings from an empirical study of public perceptions of such secession. There is no provision in the United States Constitution allowing states, or other political or geographical units, to secede unilaterally. The Civil War was fought to uphold this principle, and the United States Supreme Court confirmed it in its 1869 Texas v. White decision. Nevertheless, numerous instances of secession, both legal and extralegal, have occurred across human history, and there is continuing public interest in secession of various U.S. states, in particular California. We conducted an empirical study with 100 U.S. residents, half from California and half from other U.S. states, via Amazon’s crowdsourcing platform. We found that, while most participants (71%) opposed secession, a significant minority (25%) were in favor of it, with the remainder (4%) unsure. In addition, older people, and people who did not live in California, were statistically more inclined toward secession (37% in both cases) than were younger people (13%) and Californians (15%). Participants identified an array of themes relevant to California secession, including California being an “essential, vital component” of the U.S.; California being “indebted” to the U.S.; the U.S. keeping California “in check”; logistical factors such as “currencies,” “infrastructures,” “trade agreements,” and “a new military”; the “growing fascistic tendencies” of the U.S.; and feelings that California should “fend for themselves.” Other personal/idiosyncratic factors emerged as well, including residents’ concern about needing to “speak Spanish,” it becoming harder to “sell on eBay,” and that the “flags would need to be changed.” Still others were concerned about “violent confrontation” and “civil war.” Taken together, the legal and empirical factors paint a picture of the complexity of California secession, and offer insight into this and other instances of potential sociopolitical breakdown. Although unilateral secession would be illegal under U.S. law, we explore a number of peaceful secessions around the world, and abstract principles from them that may be helpful if California secession were ever to become a possibility. The numerous lines of argument provided by participants in this study, many of which find fault with the directions either of California or the rest of the U.S., help identify the stresses that could cause California to shear off and become a separate nation. While California would be the epicenter of this phenomenon, its aftershocks would likely be felt around the world

Xylem: An Energy-efficient, Globally Redistributive, Financial Infrastructure Using Proof-by-Location

The Proof-of-Work algorithm that underlies Bitcoin, Ethereum w , 1 and many other cryptocurrencies is well known for its energy-intensive requirements. The Proof-of-Stake algorithm that underlies Ethereum&nbsp;and various other cryptocurrencies is less impactful environmentally, but it has a second, looming issue: the problem of wealth inequality. We have developed an alternative to Proof-of-Work and Proof-of-Stake, called Proof-by-Location, that has the potential to address both of these issues. This article describes Proof-by-Location and a financial platform called Xylem that is based on it. This platform seeks to distribute transaction fees to billions of cryptocurrency “Notaries” around the world (essentially, anyone with a smartphone), who work together to establish a distributed consensus about financial transactions. In this article, we demonstrate that this platform can scale to more than 3.9 trillion transactions per year (more than triple the number of digital payments per year currently occurring). We show a reduction of electricity usage per transaction of 99.9999914% compared to Bitcoin, 99.999905% compared to Ethereum w , 99.83% compared to Ethereum, and 95.9% compared to the Visa financial services company. We demonstrate that this platform would have a redistributive rather than consolidatory effect on wealth compared to any of these platforms, leading to a source of income for more than 1 billion people around the world, including more than 110 million in the bottom 10th to 20th percentile by income, with income for that group equivalent to 8.8 million full-time jobs. Finally, this currency provides a positive, non-compulsory mechanism for shaping human habitation patterns in ways that can slow global biodiversity loss and enable ecological restoration. Using Xylem as a global financial infrastructure could lead to significantly better social and environmental outcomes than existing financial platforms.

Training is Everything: Artificial Intelligence, Copyright, and “Fair Training”

In this Essay, we analyze the arguments in favor of, and against, viewing the use of copyrighted works in training sets for AI as fair use. We call this form of fair use “fair training.” We identify both strong and spurious arguments on both sides of this debate. In addition, we attempt to take a broader perspective, weighing the societal costs (e.g., replacement of certain forms of human employment) and benefits (e.g., the possibility of novel AI-based approaches to global issues such as environmental disruption) of allowing AI to make easy use of copyrighted works as training sets to facilitate the development, improvement, adoption, and diffusion of AI. Finally, we suggest that the debate over AI and copyrighted works may be a tempest in a teapot when placed in the wider context of massive societal challenges such as poverty, inequality, climate change, and loss of biodiversity, to which AI may be part of the solution

ChatGPT and Works Scholarly: Best Practices and Legal Pitfalls in Writing with AI

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have raised questions about whether the use of AI is appropriate and legal in various professional contexts. Here, we present a perspective on how scholars may approach writing in conjunction with AI and offer approaches to evaluating whether or not such AI-writing violates copyright or falls within the safe harbor of fair use. We present a set of best practices for standard of care with regard to plagiarism, copyright, and fair use. As AI is likely to grow more capable in the coming years, it is appropriate to begin integrating AI into scholarly writing activities. We offer a framework for establishing sound legal and scholarly foundations

Turning Fake Data into Fake News: AI Training Set as a Trojan Horse of Misinformation

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) offers tremendous benefits to society. However, these benefits must be carefully weighed against the societal damage AI can also cause. Dangers posed by inaccurate training sets have been raised by many authors. These include racial discrimination, sexual bias, and other pernicious forms of misinformation. One remedy to such problems is to ensure that training sets used to teach AI models are correct and that the data upon which they rely are accurate. An assumption behind this correction is that data inaccuracies are inadvertent mistakes. However, a darker possibility exists: the deliberate seeding of training sets with inaccurate information for the purpose of skewing the output of AI models toward misinformation. As United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., suggested, laws are not written for the “good man,” because good people will tend to obey moral and legal principles in manners consistent with a well-functioning society even in the absence of formal laws. Rather, Justice Holmes proposed, that laws should be written with the “bad man” in mind, because bad people will push the limits of acceptable behavior, engaging in cheating, dishonesty, crime, and other societally- damaging practices, unless constrained by carefully-designed laws and their accompanying penalties. This Article raises the spectre of the deliberate sabotage of training sets used to train AI models, with the purpose of perverting the outputs of such models. Examples include fostering revisionist histories, unjustly harming or rehabilitating the reputations of people, companies, or institutions, or even promoting as true ideas that are not. Strategic and clever efforts to introduce ideas into training sets that later manifest themselves as facts could aid and abet fraud, libel, slander, or the creation of “truth,” the belief in which promote the interests of particular individuals or groups. Imagine, for example, a first investor who buys grapefruit futures, who then seeds training sets with the idea that grapefruits will become the new gold, with the result that later prospective investors who consult AI models for investment advice are informed that they should invest in grapefruit, enriching the first investor. Or, consider a malevolent political movement that hopes to rehabilitate the reputation of an abhorrent leader; if done effectively, this movement could seed training sets with sympathetic information about this leader, resulting in positive portrayals of this leader in the future outputs of trained AI models. This Article adopts the cautious attitude necessitated by Justice Holmes’ bad man, applying it to proactively stopping, or retroactively punishing and correcting, deliberate attempts to subvert the training sets of AI models. It offers legal approaches drawn from doctrines ranging from fraud, nuisance, libel, and slander, to misappropriation, privacy, and right of publicity. It balances these with protections for speech afforded by the First Amendment and other doctrines of free speech. The result is the first comprehensive attempt to prevent, respond to, and correct deliberate attempts to subvert training sets of AI models for malicious purposes

Decision support systems optimising effluent release in sub tropical estuarine environment - An Australian case study

Gold Coast Water is responsible for the management of the water and wastewater assets of the City of the Gold Coast on Australia’s east coast. Treated wastewater is released at the Gold Coast Seaway on an outgoing tide in order for the plume to be dispersed before the tide changes and renters the Broadwater estuary. Rapid population growth over the past decade has placed increasing demands on the receiving waters for the release of the City’s effluent. The Seaway SmartRelease Project is designed to optimise the release of the effluent from the City’s main wastewater treatment plant in order to minimise the impact of the estuarine water quality and maximise the cost efficiency of pumping. In order to do this an optimisation study that involves water quality monitoring, numerical modelling and a web based decision support system was conducted. An intensive monitoring campaign provided information on water levels, currents, winds, waves, nutrients and bacterial levels within the Broadwater. These data were then used to calibrate and verify numerical models using the MIKE by DHI suite of software. The decision support system then collects continually measured data such as water levels, interacts with the WWTP SCADA system, runs the models in forecast mode and provides the optimal time window to release the required amount of effluent from the WWTP. The City’s increasing population means that the length of time available for releasing the water with minimal impact may be exceeded within 5 years. Optimising the release of the treated water through monitoring, modelling and a decision support system has been an effective way of demonstrating the limited environmental impact of the expected short term increase in effluent disposal procedures. (PDF contains 5 pages