Yes, this is a discussion forum, so while you're welcome to pose ethical questions, you should also feel free to weigh in on them too ;) It's a challenging question.
Is it the mere fact of someone being aroused by children that makes child pornography offensive to society, or is it our belief that the creation of such materials necessary involves some degree of exploitation? If the latter, what about the well-documented risks of exploitation of consenting adult pornographic performers? Does access to pornography increase or decrease adults' tendencies to engage in unsanctioned sexual acts?
>…If the latter, what about the well-documented risks of exploitation of consenting adult pornographic performers?
I’m not sure what you’re trying to get at here but your post kind of reads like “child sexual abuse material is equivalent to porn made by consenting adults.” Posing that as a philosophical “what if” and then moving on isn’t very different from just stating that as an opinion.
I am not really interested in engaging on this topic, as the sort of “Debate me!”-style hot take is (in my experience) not usually offered in good faith, rather it’s more often some sort of rhetorical dick measuring contest amongst internet strangers.
For an exceptionally loose definition of "equivalent" good faith and bad faith are equivalent (they’re both phrases that use the word “faith”), same goes for apples and oceans (mostly water)
The position that “things are equivalent in the case that I get to define all of the words “ isn’t the dialectical Judo throw that you think it is, buddy. It does not inspire confidence that a person is being serious.
Right now yes, but that will not always be the case. You can already (with some effort) get high quality results for incongruous juxtapositions like 'hamsters playing golf' or the like, and it's not hard to imagine bridging the different semantic gaps.
So we should discuss it as an ethical problem because it's going to become practical and affordable far sooner than most people think. I would bet money it's already been tried and maybe done successfully, but for obvious reasons not advertised.
Unless that input is newly created, why would using existing data (let's say, b the police, who collected it from various criminals in the past) be any more harmful than not using it?
By what definition, principle or authority do you determine what is AI?
Don't take this the wrong way, but I find that people with more knowledge of the subject tend to be more open about what they include, whereas people with less knowledge tend to do more gatekeeping. AI has a "moving goal post" issue that is notable enough to warrant a wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
If I may, there's no real reason to break out ACL vs. NAACL vs. EMNLP, since they're all run by the ACL and one would be hard-pressed to say how the EMNLP community might differ from the ACL community at this point. And if you're doing NAACL you might want to do EACL and IJCNLP too.
I have been doing this for a long time, and FreeDB's metadata is way, way worse than MusicBrainz's, and has less coverage too.
If you find any issues in MusicBrainz metadata you can submit a correction, which will be reviewed and voted on by community members. I've done this maybe 4-5 times for my collection of about 2000 releases and in each case, my correction was quickly accepted.
Get W. Sidney Allen's slim text _Vox Graeca_. It goes over not only how Ancient Greek was pronounced but also how we know. The evidence includes explicit notes from grammarians and other writers, graffiti, borrowings, puns, and later forms of Greek. Allen also has another book _Vox Latina_ which does the same thing for Latin.
But I didn't ask about how we know the pronunciation. I asked about how we know how to say hello. There are any number of good reasons the word for olive oil might be attested in Greek. It's not so obvious why "hello" would be attested -- it's usually something you say, not something you write down.
This one seems tricky. English letters do not normally begin with "hello", or even with any synonymous phrase. Instead, they use forms that are specific to written letters.
"text normalization" just refers to that sort of thing. it's a subcomponent of the "front-end" of a speech synthesizer but it can also be used for speech recognition (if your training data contains things like "145" you may want to convert it to read "one hundred and forty five", for various reasons) and information extraction (perhaps you want to treat "145" and "one hundred and forty five" as the same).
Mechanical reproduction is a force multiplier allowing your art to touch millions or billions. (Mozart & Michelangelo didn't know this was coming, but I'm a consequentialist, so I give them credit for it.)
Far smaller is the audience for play-by-plays of competitive chess. I'd guess because the experience is less visceral? I've read a beginner-intermediate books with this kind of play-by-play and found it interesting enough, but I'd take my record collection over those books any day.
Is it the mere fact of someone being aroused by children that makes child pornography offensive to society, or is it our belief that the creation of such materials necessary involves some degree of exploitation? If the latter, what about the well-documented risks of exploitation of consenting adult pornographic performers? Does access to pornography increase or decrease adults' tendencies to engage in unsanctioned sexual acts?