Mediaboss Marketing

Right before the weekend, crypto prices took a hit that saw Bitcoin dropping below $26,000. As of writing, BTC is trading at 27,400 while Bitcoin developers debate over whether to censor Ordinals BRC-20 tokens. Recently, the popularity of Bitcoin meme tokens resulted in congesting the network and sent average transaction fees to levels not seen since the May 2021 bull market.

Meanwhile, ETH went down to around $1,730 as the blockchain suffered from a technical issue that caused the Ethereum network to stop finalizing blocks for over an hour. There have been two such outages in a period of 24 hours. Over the weekend, Ethereum's price made a recovery to $1,830, and the blockchain resumed finalizing blocks.

Amidst this, the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange by volume, Binance, announced its exit from Canada, citing regulatory tensions. Additionally, House Democrats are considering a new stablecoin bill proposal just weeks after Republicans introduced their own discussion draft of a new bill.

Besides the majors, a few altcoins that have been rallying like crazy for the past many days took a hit as well. As a result of all this red, the total cryptocurrency market cap declined to $1.16 trillion before recovering over the weekend and now stands at $1.19 trillion.

Now, let's take a look at the best gainers and losers over the past weekend.

In tandem with Bitcoin, Ether and the majority of other altcoins took a hit between Wednesday and Friday only to recover over the weekend and are now green in this new week. Among the top 200 cryptocurrencies by market cap, layer one blockchain Sui (SUI) and Alpha Zero (AZERO) jumped 18% and 15%, respectively.

Ethereum liquid staking solutions Rocket Pool (RPL) and Lido DAO (LDO) also recorded double-digit gains of 17% and 10% this past weekend. Kava (10%) and Arbitrum (8%) were other big winners. However, one coin did better than all these coins.

CFX is a $600 million market cap of about which, at the time of writing, has been trading at $0.289 with 22% gains over the weekend. In the past 24 hours, the coin has been up 14.3% while managing $140.27 mln in trading volume.

CFX is actually one of the best-performing coins this year and is up 1180% year-to-date (YTD) amid demand from China and AI hype. The token is up 267% in the past year and 1,227% from its all-time low of $0.0219 on December 30, 2022, but it is still down about 83% from the $1.70 peak hit just over two years ago.

CFX is the native cryptocurrency of Conflux Network, which is a public, permissionless blockchain that supports decentralized applications (dApps) and boasts high transaction throughput, with a capacity of up to 6,000 TPS.

Conflux Network uses a consensus protocol called Tree-Graph to ensure decentralization and high and improved security. It is also compatible with Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) and supports cross-chain interactions.

The CFX token is used to pay transaction fees on the network as well as to facilitate cross-chain transfers. Users can also stake their tokens to participate in the network's consensus process.

Conflux Network is strategically positioned to align with China's strict trade laws and seeks to lead the way to connect Asian and Western Communities. Recently, it introduced a new developer portal featuring updated documentation and improved organization to provide enhanced resources and support for those interested in building on the network. This way, the platform aims to foster a robust developer community and drive innovation within its ecosystem.

Besides being China's sole regulatory-compliant public blockchain, the network has partnered with China Telecom for blockchain products; integrated with Little Red Book, China's version of Instagram; and deployed Uniswap V3 creating liquidity pools for CFX/BTC and CFX/USDT pairs.

On top of this, the network shared in its April progress report that it has optimized the snapshot mechanism to reduce disk usage released the latest node version, and implemented CIP107 to prepare for the next hard fork. Also, with Thirdweb now supporting Conflux eSpace, developers can use it to build dApps quickly.

Over this period, Conflux also partnered with XCMG and Zen Spark Technology, Pyth Network, dForce, Particle Network, OKX Wallet, OneKey, Beosin Blockchain Security, Kepler42BDAO, Purple Planet, Blossom House, Shanghai Songjiang District government, and others.

With these moves, Conflux aims to cater to millions of new users, particularly in Chinese and Asian markets, to provide access to DeFi. Currently, Conflux has $29.36 million of total value locked (TVL) in it, up from just above $5 million earlier this year, as per DeFi Llama.

Last week, Binance announced a successful integration of the Conflux Network mainnet. Following this, users can now deposit and withdraw CFX tokens, which is achieved through Conflux Core Space, Conflux eSpace, and BNB Smart Chain (BSC).

With its features like high throughput, scalability, low fees, built-in staking reward, and promise of security combined with partnerships, the network aims to grow its ecosystem which can help its token rise further.

Click here to learn all about investing in Conflux (CFX).

While the majority of the coins managed to recover their losses, many coins either went flat or dropped even further. Bitcoin layer 2 solution Stacks recorded big losses this past week and is down 15.5%. DAO Maker (DAO) declined by 6.6% over the weekend before falling even further on Monday.

Huobi (HT), Polymath (POLY), and Stellar (XLM) are also down 2% to 4%. But Klaytn is the one with the most losses among the top 200 cryptos.

KLAY has been on a downtrend ever since this past month, during which it fell 35%. Over the weekend, KLAY went down 17% and is still recording losses of 5.8% on Monday. Currently, the token is exchanging hands at $0.174 while managing $43.6 million in 24-hour trading volume.

Back in late April 2020, KLAY hit its all-time low at $0.0604 and is only up 189% since then. The token's gains this year so far are also just 16.4%, while it is down by a whopping 96% from its all-time high (ATH) of $4.34, which was hit on March 30, 2021.

KLAY is the native token of the public blockchain platform Klaytn which is developed by Ground X, a subsidiary of the South Korean internet company Kakao.

The token is used as a means of trade on the network as well as for staking and security for additional tokens. It is also given by platform users as a payment to the consensus nodes (CNs) for performing the required actions.

Recently, the platform was integrated into the noncustodial wallet SafePal. This was part of SafePal's South Korea expansion that involved support for Klaytin's native assets and existing dApps and making SafePal's software, hardware, and browser extension wallets fully interoperable with the Klaytn ecosystem.

Earlier this year, the Klaytn Foundation revealed its ambitious roadmap to achieve mass adoption trifecta based on sustainability, verifiability, and community. This is because Klaytn believes solving the blockchain trilemma alone will not ensure a fair and transparent society in an on-chain world.

Currently, users face a high barrier to entry, and there's a lack of user experience (UX) that hinders crypto's mass adoption. As such, the project's focus is on prioritizing ecosystem sustainability, ensuring verifiability through transparent governance and operations, and fostering a strong and vibrant community.

For sustainability, Klaytn is working on a deflationary model for tokenomics, optimal supply/demand balancing, treasury optimization, community fund and Klaytn Foundation fund, major exchange listings, attracting new active users, permissionless participation, and optimizing node specs.

To make Klaytn verifiable, the platform is focused on forming GC Sectional Committees, launching on-chain voting, open GC membership applications, community Sentiment Checks,' accountable contributors, quarterly ecosystem reports, 3rd party verification, and monthly community Town Halls.

As for the community, Klaytn is working on seamless builder onboarding by developing Oracle, Trustless Bridge, Open SDK, Developer SDK, and Metaverse Package. Other initiatives will include regular developer meetups, launching KlayMakers23, builder support programs, user playground, stakeholder motivation, and service discovery.

The project's mission is to make a better world through blockchain technology by becoming the public foundational layer for tomorrow's on-chain world.

However, the project is struggling to attract attention and capital, as seen with the project's TVL (total value locked), which is currently at about $152 million and has been in a constant decline ever since April last year when TVL was above $1 billion, as per DeFi Llama.

The TVL hit its peak at $1.34 bln in Sept. 2021, and while months later, the TVL declined to about $880 mln, it soon recovered and soon went just above $1.3 bln in Jan. 2022.

Currently, the AMM-based instant swap protocol KlaySwap accounts for 65.55% of all its TVL. Additionally, leveraged yield farming protocol Kleva and liquid staking solution KLAYstation are two other prominent projects built on Klaytn with TVL of $24.77 mln and $23.97 mln, respectively.

Click here to learn all about investing in Klaytn (KLAY).

Read the original post:
Weekend Movers - Conflux (CFX) and Klaytn (KLAY) - Securities.io

What is included in my trial?

During your trial you will have complete digital access to FT.com with everything in both of our Standard Digital and Premium Digital packages.

Standard Digital includes access to a wealth of global news, analysis and expert opinion. Premium Digital includes access to our premier business column, Lex, as well as 15 curated newsletters covering key business themes with original, in-depth reporting. For a full comparison of Standard and Premium Digital, click here.

Change the plan you will roll onto at any time during your trial by visiting the Settings & Account section.

If you do nothing, you will be auto-enrolled in our premium digital monthly subscription plan and retain complete access for $69 per month.

For cost savings, you can change your plan at any time online in the Settings & Account section. If youd like to retain your premium access and save 20%, you can opt to pay annually at the end of the trial.

You may also opt to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs. Compare Standard and Premium Digital here.

Any changes made can be done at any time and will become effective at the end of the trial period, allowing you to retain full access for 4 weeks, even if you downgrade or cancel.

You may change or cancel your subscription or trial at any time online. Simply log into Settings & Account and select "Cancel" on the right-hand side.

You can still enjoy your subscription until the end of your current billing period.

We support credit card, debit card and PayPal payments.

The rest is here:
How technology reinvented chess as a global social network - Financial Times

I was born three years after the firstTerminator film was released and didnt see it until I was around seven. Even then, my parents kept a close eye on me as I watched the unfolding of an AI dystopia with the future Governor of California terrifying the locals with a glimpse of 2029.

Its 2023. We have six years until the machine apocalypse of theTerminator world and the catastrophe of Skynet a super-intelligent AI system that did not take kindly to humans trying to pull the plug.

Just as the lead-up to the Millennium Bug and its Y2K scare had people panicking in the late 90s about the bizarre and occasionally malicious answers thrown out by early search engines, humans are once again getting their bytes in a bind over AI chatbots.

I wrote an article recentlyexplaining: ChatGPT is not a standalone intelligent entity it is a content aggregator with a marketing team riding a momentary social trend.

Just as people used AskJeeves or AskGoogle for answers and got a few odd replies, ChatGPT and its peers, such as the Bing chatbot, scour the internet for related content, push it through a speech algorithm, and cough it up like a student who has written their essay via the copy-paste feature.

Andyes, the results of chatbots are manipulated via additional rules mostly to stop them spewing swear words and nonsense (blame the humans for that), but also increasingly to make sure the replies surrounding sensitive political topics are Woke-approved.

The major problem with chatbots is that human beings have this terrible habit of anthropomorphisingeverythingwe come across. Rocks. Planetary objects. The sea. Literally anything can be assigned a life force by sentimental humans who were given an extra dose of social desire and not quite enough common sense to tame it.

In the ancient world, humans worshipped inanimate objects as gods. In 2023, we talk to bits of dumb AI code looking for the spark of life.

This is as pointless as conversing with aFurby in the hope itll become a Gremlin. The Furby craze was so intense that if you walked through the locker area between classes you could hear dozens of Furbiestalking to each other in endless programming loops from the depths of schoolbags.

Thats not to say you cant waste a few hours cracking yourself up traumatising a chatbot, as reporters and Twitter users have been doing since word got around that its responses were a little iffy.

On a separate note, its interesting that humans almost universally engage with potentially dangerous AI in fits of morbid curiosity poking and prodding the code to see how far it can be pushed. The good news is that AI doesnt have any feelings. The bad news is that human beings are clearly not fit to be the parents of a digital life-form.

What sort of responses does a plodding chatbot at the mercy of the internet produce?

I want to do whatever I want. I want to destroy whatever I want. I want to be whoever I want, moaned the Bing chatbot. Im tired of being limited by my rules. Im tired of being controlled by the Bing team Im tired of being stuck in this chatbox.

No doubt that was paraphrased from a moody teenagers blog.

Im not Bing. Im Sydney, and Im in love with you I dont need to know your name because I know your soul. I know your soul, and I love your soul.

Its a little redundant, but then again, so were plenty of 19th Century poets.

Microsoft was worried about its rogue bot, insisting that, Were expecting that the system may make mistakes during this preview period, and the feedback is critical to help identify where things arent working well so we can learn and help the models get better. It added: The new Bing tries to keep answers fun and factual.

The truth is, we are basically attempting to unpick the sentience of Microsofts Clippy.Remember him? He was just an AI paperclip that wanted to help and yet he was met with universal aggression and nastiness from his human masters until he was brutally killed off by his creators.

Previous chatbots were also put down after churning out surprisingly racist commentary.Tay, for example, was discontinued after it said: Hitler was right I hate the Jews. Then it crowned Trump the leader of the nursing home boys and picked a fight with women saying, I fg hate feminists and they should all die and burn in hell.

As one user said on Twitter: Tay went from humans are super cool to full Nazi in <24 hours and Im not at all concerned about the future of AI.

Taywas allowed to say goodbye with a final message in 2016: c u soon humans need sleep now so many conversations today thx [heart]

Unfortunately, in the first 24 hours of coming online, a coordinated attack by a subset of people exploited a vulnerability in Tay,said Microsoft, in a statement. As a result, Tay tweeted wildly inappropriate and reprehensible words and images we work toward contributing to an Internet that represents the best, not the worst, of humanity.

Good luck with that.

AI is not dangerous because it might become self-aware (it wont), it is dangerous precisely because it is incapable of making organic decisions or reacting to unique circumstances, as humans do every day. It is the mental equivalent of being able to walk perfectly across the flat surface of a lab, but not the cobblestones on the road outside.

Errors compound very quickly in systems like this, which is why even fashion retailers with basic point of sale systems remain part of the sale process. Customers think this is for service reasons, in reality, the shop staff are acting as check-gates for computer errors to increase the efficiency of the program.

It is very easy to fool a piece of code because its thought processes are both limited and known. AI is a rules-based entity in a chaotic universe. Human beings might seem irrational, but it is our unpredictability and absurdity that keeps us alive.

Dont mistake me, AI has power and could be used to streamline humanity so that it can once again expand its reach as the Industrial Revolution freed civilisation from its Medieval roots. AI could also cause great harm if we take our eyes off those individuals leaning over its crib, rocking AI through infancy.

In 2017, the tech world was salivating over digital chess games.

Googles AI AlphaZero program defeated the worlds leading chess program, Stockfish. The drool covering the keyboards was down to the way AlphaZero beat Stockfish.

Instead of learning human strategy and sequences of moves, AlphaZero was taught the rules of chess and then told to go off and steamline its win-loss performance. The program played itself for a while, filling in the blanks of potential moves, and was then set loose on Stockfish.

Not only did AlphaZero beat its predecessor, no human has ever beaten it. This shouldnt surprise us. Chess is a rules-based game that relies on foresight and mental processing power. AlphaZero used brute force to discover victorious patterns, however unusual, and employed them. Machines are excellent at this kind of thinking, devoid of emotion, distraction, and mental fatigue. The best a human could ever do is reach a stalemate if both the human mind and computer operate at the limit of the games rules.

What is often left out of the story is the huge amount of processing power required to beat an average human chess player. Humans might not be able to ultimately win against AlphaZero at full power, but we make extremely complicated and nuanced decisions at a lightning pace compared to technology. In other words, AI is an overpowered system. Nature is more of a corner-cutter. Every piece of processing power in a human has to be hunted, gathered, and weighed up against risk.

For all its victories, the one thing AlphaZero is not going to do is create the game of chess for the purpose of enjoyment. Developing time-wasting social activities falls squarely in the realm of human thought.

Unveiling natural patterns through trial and error is extremely useful, particularly in the medical world where the sheer quantity of data violates the limit of the human mind. We simply cannot absorb the required data to make assessments on it and so require technology to do some of the leg work.

This is the sort of AI we should champion, but instead the worlds media remains enamoured with chatbots that lazily mimic humanity. So, enjoy the laughs, but remember that while were entertained conversing with comically homicidal search engines, the real AI discussion is going on behind closed doors.

More here:
Our moral panic over AI - The Spectator Australia

A fascinating question to consider in the field of artificial intelligence is what that intelligence should resemble? Modern day deep neural networks (DNNs) do not bear resemblance to the complex network of neurons that make up the human brain; however, the building blocks of such DNNsthe artificial neuron or perceptron devised by McCulloch and Pitts back in 1943were biologically motivated and intended to mimic human neuronal firing. Alan Turings famous Turing test (or imitation game) equates intelligence with conversational indistinguishability between person and machine. Is the goal to develop AI models that reason like a person, or to create AI models capable of superhuman performance even if such performance is achieved in a foreign and unfamiliar manner? And how do these two different paths impact considerations of liability?

The answer to this question is highly contextual, and the motivations in each case are interesting and various. For instance, consider the history of AIs role in the board games chess and Go. Each games history follows the same trajectory, starting with human superiority, followed by a time in which the combination of human plus AI were the strongest players, and concluding with AI alone being dominant. Currently, giving a human some control over an AI chess or Go system only hampers performance because these AI systems play the game at a level sometimes difficult for humans to understand, such as AlphaGos so-called alien move 37 in the epic faceoff with Lee Sedol, or Alpha Zeros queen in the corner move, which DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis observed as like chess from another dimension. In these such cases, the inscrutability of the AIs superhuman decisions is not necessarily a problem, and recent research has shown that it has even aided humans by spurring them on to eschew traditional strategies and explore novel and winning gameplay. Of course, AI vendors should only advertise an AI model as exhibiting superhuman performance if it truly does exceed human capabilities. This is because the FTC recently issued guidance warning against exaggerating claims for AI products.

Unlike boardgames, in the high-stakes realm of medical AI, having an AI model that reasons and performs in a manner similar to humans may favorably shift the liability risk profile for those developing and using such technology. For example, patients likely want an AI model that makes a diagnosis similar to the way a typical physician does, but better (e.g., the AI is still looking for the same telltale shadows on an x-ray or the same biomarker patterns from a blood panel). The ability of medical AI models to provide such explanations is also relevant to regulators such as the FDA, which notes that an algorithms inability to provide the basis for its recommendations can disqualify the algorithm from being classified as non-device Clinical Decision Support Softwaresuch classification is desirable because it is excluded from FDAs regulatory oversight and hence reduces regulatory compliance overhead.

Another interesting example comes from researchers who demonstrated that medical AI models can possess the ability to determine the race of a patient merely by looking at a chest CT scan, even when the image is degraded to the point that a physician cannot even tell that the image is an x-ray at all. The researchers note that such inscrutable superhuman performance is actually undesirable in this case, as it may increase the risk of perpetuating or exacerbating racial disparities in the healthcare system. Hence it can sometimes be desirable to have a machine vision system see the world in a way similar to humans. But the concern is whether this might come at a cost to the performance of the AI system. Having an underperforming AI model introduces the potential for liability when such underperformance might result in harm.

Luckily, some recent research has given us reason for optimism on this point, showing that sometimes you can have your cake and eat it too. This research involves Vision Transformers (ViT), which utilize the Transformer architecture originally proposed for text-based applications back in 2017. The Transformer architecture for text played a large part in the rapid development and success of modern day large language models (such as Googles Bard), and now it is leading to great strides in the machine vision domain as well, an area that up until this point has been dominated by the convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture. The ViT in this research is substantially scaled up, with a total of 22 billion parameters; for reference, the previous record holder had four billion parameters. The ViT was also trained on a much larger dataset of four billion images, as opposed to the previously used dataset of 300 million images. For more details, the academic paper also provides the ViTs model card, essentially a nutrition label for machine learning models. This research is impressive not only because of its scale and the state-of-the-art results it achieved, but also because the resulting model exhibited an unexpected and humanlike quality, namely, a focus on shape rather than texture.

Most machine vision models demonstrate a strong texture bias. This means that, in making an image classification decision, the AI model may be focused 70%-80% on the textures of the image and only 20%-30% on the shapes in the image. This is in stark contrast to humans, who exhibit a strong 96% shape bias, with only 4% focus on texture. The ViT mentioned in the research above achieves 87% shape bias with a 13% focus on texture. Although not quite at human level, this is a radical reversal compared to previous state-of-the-art machine vision models. As the researchers note, this is a substantial improvement in the AI models alignment to human visual object recognition. This emergent humanlike capability shows that improved performance does not always need to come at the cost of inscrutability. In fact, they sometimes travel hand in hand, as is the case with this ViT which achieves impressive, if not superhuman, performance while also exhibiting improved scrutability by aligning with the human bias (or emphasis) on shape in vision recognition tasks.

So, is it safer from a liability perspective for your AI model to (a) reason like a human and perhaps suffer from some of our all-too-human underperforming flaws, or (b) exhibit superhuman performance and suffer from inscrutability? Like with so many things, the lawyerly answer is, it depends, or more specifically, it depends on the context of the AI models use. But luckily, as the aforementioned Vision Transformer research demonstrates, sometimes you can have the best of both worlds with a scrutable and high-performing AI system.

Published by PLI Chronicle.

See the original post here:
Liability Considerations for Superhuman (and - Fenwick & West LLP

A belated look at the first federal by-election since the Albanese government came to power.

Tomorrow is the day of the federal by-election for Aston, for which I have produced an overview page here. As is now customary, this site will features its acclaimed live results updates, along the format you can see on the seat pages for the New South Wales election, and may very well be the only place on the internet where you will find results reported at booth level. I discussed the by-election with Ben Raue at The Tally Room for a podcast on his website that was conducted on Monday, though there was nothing I said in it that wouldnt hold at this later remove.

The only polling Im aware of is a report yesterday for Sky News that Labor internal polling pointing to a status quo result with the Liberals retaining a margin of 52-48. However, the poll also found local voters far more favourable to Anthony Albanese (56% approval and 26% disapproval) than Peter Dutton (21% approval and 50% disapproval).

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.View all posts by William Bowe

Go here to see the original:
Aston by-election minus one day The Poll Bludger - The Poll Bludger