Daily Archives: December 13, 2019

Unions: Strike may continue in France over Christmas Strikes are continuing in France today – The Connexion

Posted: December 13, 2019 at 3:27 pm

The Prime Minister spoke on pension reform on Wednesday (December 11), clarifying some details on the governments plan to consolidate the current 42-plan system into one single, universal plan.

Mr Philippe confirmed that the new system would go ahead, with people born in 2004 - and turning 18 in 2022 - becoming the first workers to enter directly into the new points-based plan. He also confirmed that the plans would only apply to workers born after 1975.

The PM said that the minimum age of retirement would remain at 62, but there would be financial incentives for those who continue to work longer, gradually increasing with each extra year worked, with the full amount per month available from age 64. The police will continue to be allowed to leave from age 52.

The minimum pension amount for those drawing their full pension was confirmed at 1,000 from 2022 onwards, compared to the 980 amount currently offered.

The new system will use points, collected per year worked, to calculate final pension amounts, with the point values fixed according to a golden rule, based on a system of average salaries, Mr Philippe said.

Anyone living in poverty will benefit from extra points, the PM said, without adding further specific details yet. This will mean affected people will benefit from three extra years of part-time work, paid full-time. This will apply particularly to nurses and carers, and similar professions that take on night shifts, with up to 20-30% of nurses expected to qualify for this extra, the PM said.

Mr Philippe has said that he remains firm, but not closed ("ferme, mais pas ferm") to further debate and discussion, even as he continues to push through most of the controversial reforms.

Yet, some unions have said that they are not satisfied with Mr Philippes response, with train workers from the CGT-Cheminots saying that there will be no truce [break] over Christmas as long as the stalemate remains.

Laurent Brun, from the CGT-Cheminots, said: "No break for Christmas, except if the government discovers its reason before then."

Yves Veyrier, from Force Ouvrire, said today that there will be no "stoppage" for Christmas, and Sud-Rail federal secretary Fabien Dumas said that it was even planning "a larger strike movement" to force pension reform.

Mr Veyrier said: "The right to strike is fundamental."

However, some unions said they would support a break over Christmas, including Unsa, and CFDT; the latter of which saying they want to "talk" as much as possible, and "leave people free to move around as they wish" while also "seeking all possible ways to make ourselves heard".

Former transport minister (and current ecology minister) Elisabeth Borne said: Announcing that you want to ruin the holiday season for the French public is irresponsible. Public service should firstly help users, and especially those who want to go on holiday for Christmas.

More than three quarters of SNCF and RATP workers will not be affected by the reforms. I urge them to understand the difficulties of the public.

Yet, Laurent Berger, secretary general of union CFDT, called the plans useless and unfair, while Philippe Pivet, retirement secretary at the Force Ouvrire (FO) union said: Theyre hypocritical because yes, we are keeping the legal retirement age at 62, but while still saying that its better not to leave at this age because youll lose points.

Dress it up however you like, but it still comes down to a rise in [retirement] age of two years.

Other unions including UNSA, have said that they are unhappy with the extent of the provision for people living in poverty, and said that Mr Philippes announcement had not been clear enough.

And even though the government has clarified that the plans will only apply to those born after 1975 and not the initially-planned 1963, and after 1985 for public sector workers - in a move that has been called the grandfather clause- some unions say this does not go far enough.

Didier Mathis, general secretary at the UNSA railway union, said: This still applies to 40% of our staff, especially SNCF and RATP drivers, meaning 52,000 people who are losing calculations on their pensions over the past six months.

Some unions are arguing that the grandfather clause should mean that the new system would only apply to individuals entering the workplace market from now on, and would never be applied to existing workers.

The police have called off their strike action after they were granted an audience on Thursday, December 12 with the minister for the interior Christophe Castaner, his junior minister Laurent Nuez, and the pensions high commissioner, Jean-Paul Delevoye.

They agreed that their minimum retirement age should stay at 52, for those whose career has seen them work a number of years in dangerous roles and situations.

Almost two thirds (70%) of French people remain unconvinced by the Prime Ministers speech on pensions, a new poll by Odoxa-Dentsu Consulting for news source FranceInfo and newspaperLe Figaro has found.

A similar number (67%) say that he has not made significant concessions, and 60% say that they do not believe that the reforms will usher in a fair or sustainable pension system.

Almost two thirds (68%) say that strike action against the reforms is still justified, a percentage that has not dropped since a similar poll a week ago.

Unsurprisingly, support for the PM is highest among supporters of the ruling party LREM (82% said they were convinced by his words), and much lower among opposition parties (59% of LR supporters said they were not convinced, along with 61% of PS, 68% of EELV, 82% of Insoumis, and 83% of RN).

The poll was undertaken online on December 11-12 2019, over a representative sample of 1,002 French people aged 18 and over.

More:

Unions: Strike may continue in France over Christmas Strikes are continuing in France today - The Connexion

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on Unions: Strike may continue in France over Christmas Strikes are continuing in France today – The Connexion

How Does Your Credit Score Compare to the Average? – msnNOW

Posted: at 3:27 pm

Provided by The Motley Fool How Does Your Credit Score Compare to the Average?

Credit scores affect your ability to borrow, your cost of borrowing, and all kinds of transactions with any company that checks your credit.

Since these scores are so important, it's important to know what yours is. It can also be helpful to know where you stand relative to your peers.

Fortunately, new research from The Ascent is packed with information about credit scores in the United States. You can check out how you compare to the average American, as well as people in your age group and your state. And if your score is below average, we also have some tips to help improve it so you can excel when it comes to credit.

According to The Ascent's data, the average FICO Score in the United States hit 704 in 2018. This is a four point increase from 2017 and a 14 point increase from the average score a decade before. It's also considered to be a good score that would qualify the average American for loans at reasonable rates from most lenders.

We also looked at the average FICO Score by age. Those who are 60 and over have the highest average of 747, while pre-retirees aged 50 to 59 have an average score of 713. Both of these scores are considered good to excellent.

Younger Americans tend to have lower average scores than their older counterparts, though. Young adults aged 18 to 29 average a score of 659, while adults age 30 to 39 have an average score of 677. Americans between the ages of 40 and 49 have an average score of 690.

The Ascent's research also revealed that the average VantageScore was 694 as of the first quarter of 2018. VantageScores are an alternative to FICO Scores. FICO Scores are determined using a formula created by the Fair Isaac Corporation, while VantageScore's formula was developed in 2006 by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion.

If your score is below average, you may have more trouble getting approved for financing and you may have to pay above average rates for credit cards, personal loans, or other types of financing.

But you don't have to just accept a lower score. You can be proactive and take steps to try to increase it. To do this, you need to understand that your score is based on a number of factors: your payment record, how much of your available credit you use, the age of your credit history, the types of credit you have, and how many inquiries are on your credit report (inquiries go on your report when you apply for new credit).

If you can improve your payment history by making payments on time and paying down debt, you can hopefully earn a score that's at least as good as the average Americans -- or perhaps even better.

Knowing how your score compares can help you to determine where you stand when it comes to your credit -- and whether there's room for improvement. Hopefully, your score is above average or at least equal to it. But if not, responsible behavior can boost it over time and put you on par with your peers. Then you'll be able to qualify for competitive financing from a lender of your choice.

The Motley Fool owns and recommends MasterCard and Visa, and recommends American Express. Were firm believers in the Golden Rule, which is why editorial opinions are ours alone and have not been previously reviewed, approved, or endorsed by included advertisers. The Ascent does not cover all offers on the market. Editorial content from The Ascent is separate from The Motley Fool editorial content and is created by a different analyst team. SPONSORED:

This may be the perfect cash back card! That's because it packs in $1,148 of value. Cardholders can earn up to 5% cash back and avoid interest until 2021. With such a deep bench of perks you'll wonder how this card packs in a $0 annual fee. Best yet, you can apply and get a decision in two minutes. Learn more with our in-depth review.

Read the rest here:

How Does Your Credit Score Compare to the Average? - msnNOW

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on How Does Your Credit Score Compare to the Average? – msnNOW

Opelika City Council recognizes Lamar Baker as ‘Officer of the Quarter’, issues a proclamation thanking community members for cleanup efforts in Ward…

Posted: at 3:27 pm

By Michelle KeyPublisher

Mayor Gary Fuller and the Opelika City Council recognized Lamar Baker as the Opelika Police Officer of the 4th Quarter during last weeks city council meeting. Also during the meeting, Opelika firefighter Chuck Riddle was named Firefighter of the Year. Fuller also read a proclamation honoring the community clean-up efforts in Ward 2. Councilwoman Tiffany Gibson-Pitts and Golden Rule Lodge #11 members Darryl Mitchel, Derric Baker and Demarcie Whatley were present to accept the proclamation on the communitys behalf.Michael King was also recognized in the proclamation, posthumously for his service to Ward 2. Michael was kind, loyal and committed to make sure that Ward 2 was clean, Fuller read. King passed away in November 2018. Also during the meeting, the council: approved a request 2019 Victorian Front Porch Tour for street closures during the event approved a request from Mama Mocha Coffee for a street closure for the Longest Table Event denied a revised request from Opelika Main Street for Christmas in a Railroad Town pertaining to the times of the road closure for 8th Street approved the Tru Blu Sports Bar request for a lounge retail liquor class I and an on-premise beer license held public hearings and subsequently voted to approve the weed abatements on the following properties:

View original post here:

Opelika City Council recognizes Lamar Baker as 'Officer of the Quarter', issues a proclamation thanking community members for cleanup efforts in Ward...

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on Opelika City Council recognizes Lamar Baker as ‘Officer of the Quarter’, issues a proclamation thanking community members for cleanup efforts in Ward…

Check Out All The New Legendaries Coming In The First Borderlands 3 DLC – TheGamer

Posted: at 3:27 pm

Here are all the new Legendary items confirmed in the upcoming Borderlands 3 DLC, Moxxi's Heist Of The Handsome Jackpot.

Weve already got a bit of a sneak peek with FL4Ks Legendary class mod, St4ckbot, which looks like it will single-handedly rejuvenate their critical hit build. Now thanks to Reddit, we have a list of all the new Legendary Class Mods, as well as some returning Legendaries from previous Borderlands games.

But first, a big thanks to Reddit user CREmACquesOM for compiling this image of all the new items. Now lets jump into the Class Mods!

Zane gets some love thanks to the Dastardly Cheap Shot Seein' Dead (which will likely be just Seein Dead with the rest being prefixes). This Class Mod is all about kill skills, boosting Donnybrook, Playing Dirty, and Violent Violence to increase dun damage, fire rate, health regen, and have a chance at firing twice per trigger pull. On top of that, the Class Mod's special ability now makes it possible to activate kill skills on merely damaging an enemy (with a 25% bonus too), making him way more viable in boss fights.

Amara, on the other hand, gets even tankier with the help of the Aware Golden Rule. Laid Bare, Mindfulness, and Helping Hands all get a boost, which provides movement speed, shield regen, and increases damage after using her action skill. The unique ability increases her action skill cooldown whenever she's damaged, which just helps all those skills even more.

RELATED:Borderlands 3: Moxxi's Heist Of The Handsome Jackpot DLC Adds OP FL4K Class Mod

And finally, Moze just does more of what she loves: shooting things. The Investing Blistering Green Monster increases Scorching RPMs, Click Click, and The Iron Bank, which all just make her shoot longer and harder. The mod also gives bonus corrosive damage the longer she holds down the trigger. Can't go wrong with that.

We also have a whole list of returning Legendary weapons from Borderlands 2, including the Nukem, Creamer, Heart Breaker, Slow Hand, Aim, and Boomer. Several of these weapons were Moxxi weapons in the previous game, which means they might also heal the user whenever theyre used to deal damage.

The new weapons are Scoville, Craps, Lucky 7, ION LASER, and Cheap Tips, which all fit into the casino theme. We dont know what they do, but theyre sure to be epic.

Moxxi's Heist Of The Handsome Jackpot arrives on December 19th.

Source: Reddit

NEXT: Borderlands 3: Everything You Need To Know About The New Patch

Laura Bailey Left The Game Awards Early To Play In Critical Role

Actually a collective of 6 hamsters piloting a human-shaped robot, Sean hails from Toronto, Canada. Passionate about gaming from a young age, those hamsters would probably have taken over the world by now if they didn't vastly prefer playing and writing about video games instead.The hamsters are so far into their long-con that they've managed to acquire a bachelor's degree from the University of Waterloo and used that to convince the fine editors at TheGamer that they can write "gud werds," when in reality they just have a very sophisticated spellchecker program installed in the robot's central processing unit.

Read the original post:

Check Out All The New Legendaries Coming In The First Borderlands 3 DLC - TheGamer

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on Check Out All The New Legendaries Coming In The First Borderlands 3 DLC – TheGamer

Hopeful 12-Year-Old Foster Child Trusting God to Find Him a Forever Home: ‘I Know There’s a Family Out There’ – Faithwire

Posted: at 3:27 pm

Despite enduring more trials and tribulations than most of us will experience in our entire lifetime, Texas youngster Jonah insists on being relentlessly optimistic.

The spirited 12-year-old made quite the impression on local Dallas TV station WFAA-TV when he appeared their Wednesdays Child segment in a full three-piece suit. The networks short features aim to highlight the stories of foster children who are seeking after an adoptive home.

I am a person who likes to uplift people, Jonah told the station. The golden rule is treat somebody the way you would like to be treated.'

Mature beyond his years, the inspiring young man said he desired to have knowledge and wisdom, and opened up about how his faith in God has helped him get through the suffering of his past.

Hes brought me through many, many things. As far as abuse before I came into CPS.. hes brought me through a lot, overall, he said.

As for how he has coped with four years in foster care, Jonah said he adopts a ruthlessly positive mindset that is rooted in his Christian faith.

Waking me up this morning, you know what I mean? Starting me on my way, Im in my right mind, I know what Im doing, I know who I am, and Im proud of the person that I am, he said.

And hes no slouch in the classroom, either. I am an honor roll student, Jonah explained. When Im in school, I focus. I got an award last year for being a multi-tasker.

As for finding a forever home, the astonishingly poised young man is assured that the right family is just around the corner.

The reason why I want to be adopted is because I know theres a family out there that fits me in the best possible way that they can, he said.

Closing out the segment, the reporter commended Jonah to prospective families and wished him well for the future.

No, you dont meet a kid like this every day, she narrated, which is why the parents who adopt him will be one lucky family.

Jonah, may they be your fiercest protectors and your never-ending source of strength.

For more information on Jonah, WFAA urged people to send all approved home studies to La Queena Warren at [emailprotected], if youre already licensed.

What a guy!

More here:

Hopeful 12-Year-Old Foster Child Trusting God to Find Him a Forever Home: 'I Know There's a Family Out There' - Faithwire

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on Hopeful 12-Year-Old Foster Child Trusting God to Find Him a Forever Home: ‘I Know There’s a Family Out There’ – Faithwire

North Dakota conservatives seek to deny refuge to those in need – Patheos

Posted: at 3:27 pm

The word conservative is doing a lot of unspoken work in this story. It serves, among other things, as both an accusation and a defiant confession.

North Dakota county may become USs 1st to bar new refugees

If they vote to bar refugees, as expected, Burleigh County home to about 95,000 people and the capital city of Bismarck could become the first local government to do so since President Donald Trumpissued an executive ordermaking it possible.

Trumps executive order this fall came as he had already proposed cutting the number of refugees next year to the lowest level since Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980. He declared that refugees should be resettled only in places where the state and local governments counties gave consent. Since then, many governors and counties around the country have declared that they would continue taking refugees.

Republican Gov. Doug Burgum said last month that North Dakotawould continue accepting refugeeswhere local jurisdictions agreed, and his spokesman said the governor saw it as a local decision. Soon after, Cass and Grand Forks counties, which are home to the states largest city, Fargo, and third-largest city, Grand Forks, respectively, declared they would continue taking refugees. Fargo Mayor Tim Mahoney said refugees were needed to boost the citys economy, and that 90% were fully employed within three months of resettling in his city.

But the idea was quickly opposed in more conservative Burleigh County. Among the opponents was Republican state Rep. Rick Becker, of Bismarck, an ultraconservative who took to social media to criticize the program as unrestrained and a possible drain on social service programs, schools and law enforcement.

Burleigh County is likely to bar refugees because Burleigh County is conservative. The most outspoken opponent to permitting refuge for those fleeing violence and persecution is a local Republican state representative who is ultraconservative.

We are presented with an identity: conservative equals inhospitable to outsiders and those in need. Rick Becker is opposed to accepting refugees because he is a conservative. Rick Becker is conservative because he opposes accepting refugees.

AP reporter James MacPherson attempts to employ the word conservative as a dispassionate, disinterested descriptor a label that strives for accuracy, not for evaluation. This is in part because the article is discussing Republicans, and the generally agreed-upon consensus view is that Republicans are the conservative party in America. This is, in fact, how the Burleigh County Republicans describe themselves, so MacPhersons use of conservative is also deferential allowing those he discusses to describe themselves as they see fit.

But despite all of that despite the fact that this use of conservative here is customary, chosen, and embraced by the subjects of the article it describes here the use of the term here is still likely to be regarded by some as judgmental, pejorative, or biased. Thats due to the unavoidable substance of the article, which reports the facts of the matter, namely that in Burleigh County, North Dakota, conservatives seek to deny refuge to those in need.

Thats simply a blandly accurate description of what is happening. That this will strike many readers including many self-identified conservatives as pejorative or judgmental has nothing to do with MacPhersons or my predisposition toward these self-declared conservatives. Nor does it have anything to do with MacPhersons or my evaluation of their behavior.

I will happily add my opinion and evaluation to that simple description: Conservatives in Burleigh County seek to deny refuge to those in need and in my opinion that is a shitty, sinful, blasphemously evil thing to do.

But it doesnt matter whether or not I add that, or even whether or not I think that. What matters is that everyone thinks that including the ultra-conservative Rep. Rick Becker, his fellow anti-refugee Republicans in Burleigh County, and all of their fellow anti-refugee Republicans across America. I dont have to tell you or them that I think this because it is what everyone recognizes to be the case. Banning refugees is just shitty behavior an ignorant, selfish, dishonest, indecent violation of the Golden Rule.

This creates an uncomfortable situation for poor Rick Becker. He is defiantly proud of his self-chosen identity as a conservative. And he is adamant that being a conservative entails denying refuge to people in need. If you were to accuse him of going soft on his proposed refugee ban, he would vehemently deny that was the case, insisting that no one takes a harder line against providing refuge to refugees than he does. He will not abide the suggestion that anyone could possibly be to the right of him on this point, or that anyone else might be more conservative than he is when it comes to the conservative belief that refugees should be turned away.

And yet, at the same time, he is inescapably aware that his position is utterly gross and shameful. This is what leads him to defend that position as unwaveringly conservative rather than attempting the impossible task of defending it as good or as wise or truthful or beautiful.

Perhaps Im overstating the matter when I say that even Rick Becker and the rest of the anti-refugee Republicans of Burleigh County agree that banning refugees is shameful, sinful, ugly and evil. Maybe they dont agree with that at all. Maybe they think its good and right and just to ban refugees.

But I dont buy that, because look what happens even if we follow MacPhersons example and attempt to be as neutral as possible, stating only the stark facts of the matter and refraining from any evaluation or judgment of those facts. We could say:

1. People who describe and identify themselves as conservatives seek to ban refugees in Burleigh County, North Dakota; and

2. These same self-described conservatives insist that banning refugees from Burleigh County is the conservative thing to do.

3. Banning refugees is a shitty thing to do.

Folks like Rick Becker will try to distance and insulate themselves from that recognition by attributing that third fact to the mere opinion of specific others. Points 1 and 2 are an attack on conservatives, they will say, because most liberals think that banning refugees is a shitty thing to do.

And thats not wrong. Most liberals do think that. Because most liberals are humans and most humans think that.Most conservatives are also humans, and so most conservatives think that too.

We humans all of us, liberal, conservative, whatever tell stories about this very thing. In some of these human stories people offer refuge to others who are fleeing violence, disaster, or destruction. In other of these human stories, people refuse to offer such refuge. We humans can tell either version of that story. But what we cannot and do not ever do is tell a story in which those who refuse to offer refuge are the Good Guys.

It is impossible to tell such a story, or to hear it, or to imagine it. By definition because that is what the Good Guys means.

Rick Becker knows this. Thats why hes so defensive about proudly defending the indefensible.

Becker is quite aware that the policy hes proposing looks really bad:

This isnt about skin color, said Becker, a plastic surgeon and former gubernatorial candidate. In the past, nobody had any say whatsoever. Now we have something that should have been in place decades ago.

Now, if they want to accept them, they can, and if they dont want to they shouldnt.

So this isnt about skin color, Becker says, as everyone seems to say when theyre doing something explicitly about skin color. Becker says, rather, this is about states rights. The past isnt dead. It isnt even etc.

Im still unclear as to what it would even mean for Burleigh County to withhold its official consent for the resettlement of refugees there. Trumps executive order dreamed up by his white supremacist senior legislative aide, Stephen Miller seems illegal or unenforceable or, at best, simply beside the point. When the conservative fundamentalist Baptist church I grew up in signed up to resettle a refugee family of Boat People back in the early 1980s, we didnt seek or require the consent of Union County, N.J. We were just a group of citizens acting as such. The county government had no role, no jurisdiction, no say, and no involvement in any of that.

In providing refuge for that family, we were also a local church acting as such. Had our local county government imagined they had any legal right to muck about with our doing that, wed have taken them to court and every lawyer they tried to hire against us wouldve advised them to back off, drop the matter, and apologize to avoid losing a slam-dunk First Amendment case.

I note that Burleigh County, North Dakota, is home to many local churches that belong to traditions with a long history of welcoming refugees as an intrinsic expression and requirement of their faith. There are dozens of Lutheran congregations there that have long supported the work of Church World Service. There are local Catholic parishes that have long contributed to support refugee resettlement through the UCCB and Catholic Charities. There are scads of nondenominational white evangelical congregations that have, up until recently at least, wholeheartedly supported the refugee resettlement work of World Relief. And thats just the Christians there are also at least three synagogues in Bismarck, and Americas Jewish congregations have always way outperformed us American Christians when it comes to offering refuge to those in need.

I dont know, specifically, if any of these many many religious congregations in Burleigh County are directly involved in helping to resettle refugees in their community, but the odds are that at least some of them are or plan to be. Does the Burleigh County government imagine it has the authority to stop them by denying them its consent? Does the Republican-controlled Burleigh County government imagine that it has any hope of defending itself against the lawsuit that these congregations are likely to bring?

Yes, I realize Trump has had three years to cram hundreds of Federalist Society ideologues onto the courts, and that those bozos do not recognize religious liberty as a constitutional right, only as a political slogan having to do with letting bakeries refuse to sell baked goods or allowing pharmacists to refuse to sell Monistat because they pretend to believe its abortion cream. But even so, theres no legal basis for a county government barring local congregations from practicing their faith in the way that American congregations have done for more than a century.

The idea of a local government withholding its consent for refugee resettlement just seems confused. This is not an activity that has ever required that governments consent.

But now, according to Trumps strange executive order, were told that government consent will be required even for activities in which that government has no role or involvement. Religious groups who seek to continue doing that which religious groups have been doing will first need to seek and secure the governments permission.

There are many words that might be used to describe that state of affairs, but conservative really shouldnt be one of them.

The rest is here:

North Dakota conservatives seek to deny refuge to those in need - Patheos

Posted in Golden Rule | Comments Off on North Dakota conservatives seek to deny refuge to those in need – Patheos

What Is Ethical Egoism? – ThoughtCo

Posted: at 3:26 pm

Ethical egoism is the view that people ought to pursue their own self-interest, and no one has any obligation to promote anyone elses interests. It is thus a normative or prescriptive theory: it is concerned with how people ought to behave. In this respect, ethical egoism is quite different from psychological egoism, the theory that all our actions are ultimately self-interested. Psychological egoism is a purely descriptive theory that purports to describe a basic fact about human nature.

Everyone pursuing his own self-interest is the best way to promote the general good. This argument was made famous by Bernard Mandeville (1670-1733) in his poem "The Fable of the Bees" and by Adam Smith (1723-1790) in his pioneering work on economics, "The Wealth of Nations."

In a famous passage, Smith wrote that when individuals single-mindedly pursue the gratification of their own vain and insatiable desires they unintentionally, as if led by an invisible hand, benefit society as a whole. This happy result comes about because people generally are the best judges of what is in their own interest, and they are much more motivated to work hard to benefit themselves than to achieve any other goal.

An obvious objection to this argument, though, is that it doesnt really support ethical egoism. It assumes that what really matters is the well-being of society as a whole, the general good. It then claims that the best way to achieve this end is for everyone to look out for themselves. But if it could be proved that this attitude did not, in fact, promote the general good, then those who advance this argument would presumably stop advocating egoism.

Another objection is that what the argument states is not always true. Consider the prisoners dilemma, for instance. This is a hypothetical situation described in game theory.You and a comrade, (call him X) are being held in prison. You are both asked to confess. The terms of the deal you are offered are as follows:

Regardless of what X does, the best thing for you to do is confess. Because if he doesnt confess, youll get a light sentence; and if he does confess, youll at least avoid getting extra prison time. But the same reasoning holds for X as well. According to ethical egoism, you should both pursue your rational self-interest. But then the outcome is not the best one possible. You both get five years, whereas if both of you had put your self-interest on hold, youd each only get two years.

The point of this is simple. It isnt always in your best interest to pursue your own self-interest without concern for others. Sacrificing your own interests for the good of others denies the fundamental value of your own life to yourself.

This seems to be the sort of argument put forward by Ayn Rand, the leading exponent of objectivism and the author of "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged."Her complaint is that the Judeo-Christian moral tradition, which includesor has fed intomodern liberalism and socialism, pushes an ethic of altruism.Altruism means putting the interests of others before your own.

This is something people are routinely praised for doing, encouraged to do, and in some circumstances even required to do, such as when you pay taxes to support the needy.According to Rand, no one has any right to expect or demand that I make any sacrifices for the sake of anyone other than myself.

A problem with this argument is that it seems to assume that there is generally a conflict between pursuing your own interests and helping others.In fact, though, most people would say that these two goals are not necessarily opposed at all.Much of the time they complement one another.

For instance, one student may help a housemate with her homework, which is altruistic.But that student also has an interest in enjoying good relations with her housemates. She may not help everyone in all circumstances, but she will help if the sacrifice involved is not too great.Most people behave like this, seeking a balance between egoism and altruism.

Ethical egoism is not a very popular moral philosophy. This is because it goes against certain basic assumptions that most people have regarding what ethics involves. Two objections seem especially powerful.

Ethical egoism has no solutions to offer when a problem arises involving conflicts of interest. Many ethical issues are of this sort. For example, a company wants to empty waste into a river; the people living downstream object. Ethical egoism advises that both parties actively pursue what they want. It doesnt suggest any sort of resolution or commonsense compromise.

Ethical egoism goes against the principle of impartiality. A basic assumption made by many moral philosophersand many other people, for that matteris that we should not discriminate against people on arbitrary grounds such as race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or ethnic origin. But ethical egoism holds that we should not even try to be impartial. Rather, we should distinguish between ourselves and everyone else, and give ourselves preferential treatment.

To many, this seems to contradict the very essence of morality. The golden ruleversions of which appear in Confucianism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islamsays we should treat others as we would like to be treated. One of the greatest moral philosophers of modern times, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), argued that the fundamental principle of morality (the categorical imperative, in his jargon) is that we should not make exceptions of ourselves. According to Kant, we shouldntperform an action if we cannot honestly wish that everyone would behave in a similar way in the same circumstances.

See original here:

What Is Ethical Egoism? - ThoughtCo

Posted in Ethical Egoism | Comments Off on What Is Ethical Egoism? – ThoughtCo

AI has bested chess and Go, but it struggles to find a diamond in Minecraft – The Verge

Posted: at 3:24 pm

Whether were learning to cook an omelet or drive a car, the path to mastering new skills often begins by watching others. But can artificial intelligence learn the same way? A new challenge teaching AI agents to play Minecraft suggests its much trickier for computers.

Announced earlier this year, the MineRL competition asked teams of researchers to create AI bots that could successfully mine a diamond in Minecraft. This isnt an impossible task, but it does require a mastery of the games basics. Players need to know how to cut down trees, craft pickaxes, and explore underground caves while dodging monsters and lava. These are the sorts of skills that most adults could pick up after a few hours of experimentation or learn much faster by watching tutorials on YouTube.

But of the 660 entries in the MineRL competition, none were able to complete the challenge, according to results that will be announced at the AI conference NeurIPS and that were first reported by BBC News. Although bots were able to learn intermediary steps, like constructing a furnace to make durable pickaxes, none successfully found a diamond.

The task we posed is very hard, Katja Hofmann, a principal researcher at Microsoft Research, which helped organize the challenge, told BBC News. While no submitted agent has fully solved the task, they have made a lot of progress and learned to make many of the tools needed along the way.

This may be a surprise, especially when you think that AI has managed to best humans at games like chess, Go, and Dota 2. But it reflects important limitations of the technology as well as restrictions put in place by MineRLs judges to really challenge the teams.

The bots in MineRL had to learn using a combination of methods known as imitation learning and reinforcement learning. In imitation learning, agents are shown data of the task ahead of them, and they try to imitate it. In reinforcement learning, theyre simply dumped into a virtual world and left to work things out for themselves using trial and error.

Often, AI is only able to take on big challenges by combining these two methods. The famous AlphaGo system, for example, first learned to play Go by being fed data of old games. It then honed its skills and surpassed all humans by playing itself over and over.

The MineRL bots took a similar approach, but the resources available to them were comparatively limited. While AI agents like AlphaGo are created with huge datasets, powerful computer hardware, and the equivalent of decades of training time, the MineRL bots had to make do with just 1,000 hours of recorded gameplay to learn from, a single Nvidia graphics processor to train with, and just four days to get up to speed.

Its the difference between the resources available to an MLB team coaches, nutritionists, the finest equipment money can buy and what a Little League squad has to make do with.

It may seem unfair to hamstring the MineRL bots in this way, but these constraints reflect the challenges of integrating AI into the real world. While bots like AlphaGo certainly push the boundary of what AI can achieve, very few companies and research labs can match the resources of Google-owned DeepMind.

The competitions lead organizer, Carnegie Mellon University PhD student William Guss, told BBC News that the challenge was meant to show that not every AI problem should be solved by throwing computing power at it. This mindset, said Guss, works directly against democratizing access to these reinforcement learning systems, and leaves the ability to train agents in complex environments to corporations with swathes of compute.

So while AI may be struggling in Minecraft now, when it cracks this challenge, itll hopefully deliver benefits to a wider audience. Just dont think about those poor Minecraft YouTubers who might be out of a job.

Read the original post:

AI has bested chess and Go, but it struggles to find a diamond in Minecraft - The Verge

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on AI has bested chess and Go, but it struggles to find a diamond in Minecraft – The Verge

AI for Peace – War on the Rocks

Posted: at 3:24 pm

This article was submitted in response to thecall for ideas issued by the co-chairs of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Eric Schmidt and Robert Work. It addresses the fourth question (part a.) which asks what international norms for artificial intelligence should the United States lead in developing, and whether it is possible to create mechanisms for the development and enforcement of AI norms.

In 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower asked the world to join him in building a framework for Atoms for Peace. He made the case for a global agreement to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons while also sharing the peaceful uses of nuclear technology for power, agriculture, and medicine. No one would argue the program completely prevented the spread of weapons technology: India and Pakistan used technology gained through Atoms for Peace in their nascent nuclear weapons programs. But it made for a safer world by paving the way for a system of inspections and controls on nuclear facilities, including the establishment of the International Atomic Energy Agency and, later, the widespread ratification of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). These steps were crucial for building what became known as the nuclear nonproliferation regime.

The world stands at a similar juncture today at the dawn of the age of artificial intelligence (AI).The United States shouldapply lessonsfrom the 70-year history of governing nuclear technology by building a framework for governing AI military technology.

What would AI for Peace look like? The nature of AI is different than nuclear technology, but some of the principles that underpinned the nonproliferation regime can be applied to combat the dangers of AI. Government, the private sector, and academia can work together to bridge national divides. Scientists and technologists not just traditional policymakers will be instrumental in providing guidance about how to govern new technology. At a diplomatic level, sharing the peaceful benefits of technology can encourage countries to open themselves up to inspection and controls. And even countries that are competitors can cooperate to establish norms to prevent the spread of technology that would be destabilizing.

AI for Peace couldgo beyond current efforts by involving the private sector from the get-go and identifying the specific dangers AI presents and the global norms that could prevent those dangers (e.g., what does meaningful human control over smart machines mean in specific contexts?). It would also go beyond Department of Defense initiativesto build norms by encompassing peaceful applications. Finally, it would advance the United States historic role as a leader in forging global consensus.

The Dangers of Artificial Intelligence

The uncertainty surrounding AIs long-term possibilities makes it difficult to regulate, but the potential for chaos is more tangible. It could be used to inflict catastrophic kinetic, military, and political damage. AI-assisted weapons are essentially very smart machines that can find hidden targets more quickly and attack them with greater precision than conventional computer-guided weapons.

As AI becomes incorporated into societys increasingly autonomous information backbone, it could also pose a risk of catastrophic accidents. If AI becomes pervasive, banking, power generation, and hospitals will be even more vulnerable to cyberattack. Some speculate than an AI superintelligence could develop a strategic calculating ability so superior that it destabilizes arms control efforts.

There are limits to the nuclear governance analogy. Whereas nuclear technology was once the purview only of the most powerful states, the private sector leads AI innovation. States could once agree to safeguard nuclear secrets, but AI is already everywhere including in every smartphone on the planet.

Its ubiquity shows its appeal, but the same ubiquity lowers the cost of sowing disorder. A recent study found that for less than $10 anyone could create a fake United Nations speech credible enough to be shared on the internet as real. Controlling the most dangerous uses of technology will require private sector initiatives to build safety into AI systems.

Scientists Speak Out

In 2015, Stephen Hawking, Peter Norvig, and others signed an open letter calling for more research on AIs impacts on society. The letter recognized the tremendous benefits AI could bring for human health and happiness, but also warned of unpredictable dangers. The key issue is that humans should remain in control. More than 700 AI and robotics researchers signed the 2017 Asilomar AI Principles calling for shared responsibility and warning against an AI arms race.

The path to governing nuclear technology followed a similar pattern of exchange between scientists and policymakers. Around 1943, Niels Bohr, a famous Danish physicist, made the case that since scientists created nuclear weapons, they should take responsibility for efforts to control the technology. Two years later, after the first use of nuclear weapons, the United States created a committee to deliberate about whether the weapons should become central to U.S. military strategy, or whether the country should forego them and avoid a costly arms race. The Acheson-Lilienthal committees proposal to put nuclear weapons under shared international control failed to gain support, but it was one step in a consensus-building process. The U.S. Department of Defense, Department of State, and other agencies developed their own perspectives, and U.N. negotiations eventually produced the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Since entering into force in 1970, it has become the most widely subscribed arms control treaty in history with a total of 191 signatory states.

We are in the Acheson-Lilienthal age of governing AI. Neither disarmament nor shared control is feasible in the short term, and the best hope is to limit risk. The NPT was created with the principles of non-possession and non-transfer of nuclear weapons material and technology in mind, but AI code is too diffuse and too widely available for those principles to be the lodestar of AI governance.

What Norms Do We Want?

What then does nonproliferation look like in AI? What could or should be prohibited? One popular proposal is a no kill rule for unassisted AI: humans should bear responsibility for military attack.

A current Defense Department directive requires appropriate levels of human judgment in autonomous system attacks aimed at humans. This allows the United States to claim the moral high ground. The next step is to add specificity to what appropriate levels of judgement means in particular classes of technology. For example, greater human control might be proportional to greater potential for lethality. Many of AIs dangers stem from the possibility that it might act through code too complex for humans to understand, or that it might learn so rapidly so as to be outside of human direction and therefore threaten humanity. We must consider how these situations might arise and what could be done to preserve human control. Roboticists say that such existing tools as reinforcement learning and utility functions will not solve the control problem.

An AI system might need to be turned off for maintenance or, crucially, in cases where the AI system poses a threat. Robots often have a red shutdown button in case of emergency, but an AI system might be able learn to turn off its own off switch, which would likely be software rather than a big red button. Google is developing an off switch it terms a kill switch for its applications, and European lawmakers are debating whether and how to make a kill switch mandatory. This may require a different kind of algorithm than currently exists one with safety and interpretability at the core. It is not clear what an off switch means in military terms, but American-Soviet arms control faced a similar problem. Yet arms control proceeded though technical negotiations that established complex yet robust command and control systems.

Building International Consensus

The NPT was preceded by a quarter century of deliberation and consensus building. We are at the beginning of that timeline for AI. The purpose of treaties and consensus building is to limit the risks of dangerous technology by convincing countries that restraint is in the interests of mankind and their own security.

Nuclear nonproliferation agreements succeeded because the United States and the Soviet Union convinced non-nuclear nations that limiting the spread of nuclear weapons was in their interest even if it meant renouncing weapons while other countries still had them. In 1963, John F. Kennedy asked what it would mean to have nuclear weapons in so many hands, in the hands of countries large and small, stable and unstable, responsible and irresponsible, scattered throughout the world. The answer was that more weapons in the hands of more countries would increase the chance of accident, proxy wars, weak command and control systems, and first strikes. The threat of nuclear weapons in the hands of regional rivals could be more destabilizing than in the hands of the superpowers. We do not yet know if the same is true for AI, but we should investigate the possibility.

Access to Peaceful Technology

It is a tall order to ask countries to buy into a regime that limits their development of a powerful new technology. Nuclear negotiations offered the carrot of eventual disarmament, but what disarmament means in the AI context is not clear. However, the principle that adopting restrictions on AI weapons should be linked to access to the benefits of AI for peaceful uses and security cooperation could apply. Arms control negotiator William Foster wrote in 1967 that the NPT treaty would stimulate widespread, peaceful development of nuclear energy. Why not promise to share peaceful and humanitarian applications of AI for agriculture and medicine, for example with countries that agree to participate in global controls?

The foundation of providing access to peaceful nuclear technology in exchange for monitoring materials and technology led to the development of a system of inspections known as safeguards. These were controversial and initially not strong enough to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, but they took hold over time. A regime for AI inspection and verification will take time to emerge.

As in the nuclear sphere, the first step is to build consensus and identify what other nations want and where common interest lies. AI exists in lines of code, not molecules of uranium. For publicly available AI code, principles of transparency may help mutual inspection. For code that is protected, more indirect measures of monitoring and verification may be devised.

Finally, nuclear arms control and nonproliferation succeeded as part of a larger strategy (including extended deterrence) that provided strategic stability and reassurance to U.S. allies. America and the Soviet Union despite their Cold War competition found common interests in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. AI strategy goes hand-in-hand with a larger defense strategy.

A New AI for Defense Framework

Once again, the world needs U.S. global leadership this time to prevent an AI arms race, accident, or catastrophic attack. U.N.-led discussions are valuable but overly broad, and the technology has too many military applications for industry alone to lead regulation. Current U.N. talks are preoccupied with discussion of a ban on lethal autonomous weapons. These are sometimes termed killer robots because they are smart machines that can move in the world and make decisions without human control. They cause concern if human beings are not involved in the decision to kill. The speed and scale of AI deployment calls for more nuance than the current U.N. talks can provide, and more involvement by more stakeholders, including national level governments and industry.

As at the dawn of the nuclear age, the United States can build global consensus in the age of AI to reduce risks and make the world safe for one of its leading technologies one thats valuable to U.S. industry and to humanity.

Washington should build a framework for a global consensus on how to govern AI technology that could be weaponized. Private sector participation would be crucial to address governance, as well as how to share peaceful benefits to incentivize participation. The Pentagon, in partnership with private sector technology firms, is a natural leader because of its budget and role in the industrial base.

An AI for Peace program should articulate the dangers of this new technology, principles (e.g. no kill, human control, off switch) to manage the dangers, and a structure to shape the incentives for other states (perhaps a system of monitoring and inspection). Our age is not friendly to new treaties, but we can foster new norms. We can learn from the nuclear age that countries will agree to limit dangerous technology with the promise of peaceful benefits for all.

Patrick S. Roberts is a political scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation.Roberts served as an advisor in the State Departments Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, where he worked on the NPT and other nuclear issues.

Image: Nuclear Regulatory Commission

More:

AI for Peace - War on the Rocks

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on AI for Peace – War on the Rocks

An AI conference once known for blowout parties is finally growing up – MIT Technology Review

Posted: at 3:24 pm

Only two years ago, so Im told, one of the hottest AI research conferences of the year was more giant party than academic exchange. In a fight for the best talent, companies handed out endless free swag and threw massive, blowout events, including one featuring Flo Rida, hosted by Intel. The attendees (mostly men in their early 20s and 30s), flush with huge salaries and the giddiness of being highly coveted, drank free booze and bumped the night away.

I never witnessed this version of NeurIPS, short for the Neural Information Processing Systems conference. I came for my first time last year, after the excess had reached its peak. Externally, the community was coming under increasing scrutiny as the upset of the 2016 US presidential election drove people to question the influence of algorithms in society. Internally, reports of sexual harrassment, anti-Semitism, racism, and ageism were also driving conference goers to question whether they should continue to attend.

Sign up for The Algorithm artificial intelligence, demystified

So when I arrived in 2018, a diversity and inclusion committee had been appointed, and the long-standing abbreviation NIPS had been updated. Still, this years proceedings feel different from the last. The parties are smaller, the talks are more socially minded, and the conversations happening in between seem more aware of the ethical challenges that the field needs to address.

As the role of AI has expanded dramatically, along with the more troubling aspects of its impact, the community, it seems, has finally begun to reflect on its power and the responsibilities that come with it. As one attendee put it to me: It feels like this community is growing up.

This change manifested in some concrete ways. Many of the technical sessions were more focused on addressing real-world, human-centric challenges rather than theoretical ones. Entire poster tracks were centered on better methods for protecting user privacy, ensuring fairness, and reducing the amount of energy it can take to run and train state-of-the-art models. Day-long workshops, scheduled to happen today and tomorrow, have titles like Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning and Fairness in Machine Learning for Health.

Additionally, many of the invited speakers directly addressed the social and ethical challenges facing the fieldtopics once dismissed as not core to the practice of machine learning. Their talks were also well received by attendees, signaling a new openness to engage with these issues. At the opening event, for example, cognitive psychologist and #metoo figurehead Celeste Kidd gave a rousing speech exhorting the tech industry to take responsibility for how its technologies shape peoples beliefs and debunking myths around sexual harassment. She received a standing ovation. In an opening talk at the Queer in AI symposium, Stanford researcher Ria Kalluri also challenged others to think more about how their machine-learning models could shift the power in society from those who have it to those who dont. Her talk was widely circulated online.

Much of this isnt coincidental. Through the work of the diversity and inclusion committee, the conference saw the most diverse participation in the its history. Close to half the main-stage speakers were women and a similar number minorities; 20% of the over 13,000 attendees were also women, up from 18% last year. There were seven community-organized groups for supporting minority researchers, which is a record. These included Black in AI, Queer in AI, and Disability in AI, and they held parallel proceedings in the same space as NeurIPS to facilitate mingling of people and ideas.

When we involve more people from diverse backgrounds in AI, Kidd told me, we naturally talk more about how AI is shaping society, for good or for bad. They come from a less privileged place and are more acutely aware of things like bias and injustice and how technologies that were designed for a certain demographic may actually do harm to disadvantaged populations, she said. Kalluri echoed the sentiment. The intentional efforts to diversify the community, she said, are forcing it to confront the questions of how power works in this field.

Despite the progress, however, many emphasized that the work is just getting started. Having 20% women is still appalling, and this year, as in past years, there continued to be Herculean challenges in securing visas for international researchers, particularly from Africa.

Historically, this field has been pretty narrowed in on a particular demographic of the population, and the research that comes out reflects the values of those people, says Katherine Heller, an assistant professor at Duke University and co-chair of the diversity committee. What we want in the long run is a more inclusive place to shape what the future direction of AI is like. Theres still a far way to go.

Yes, theres still a long way to go. But on Monday, as people lined up to thank Kidd for her talk one by one, I let myself feel hopeful.

Visit link:

An AI conference once known for blowout parties is finally growing up - MIT Technology Review

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on An AI conference once known for blowout parties is finally growing up – MIT Technology Review