CBC Politics FB Live, “Finance Minister Bill Morneau speaks at Georgetown University WATCH LIVE: Finance Minister Bill Morneau delivers a speech on Canada-U.S. relations at Georgetown University.”
U of Ottawa Law Professor Michael Geist, “Canadian Privacy in the Age of Trump”
“Last night I appeared on TVO’s The Agenda with Steve Paikin to discuss privacy issues in light of the Trump Executive Order that eliminates Privacy Act protections for non-U.S. citizens or permanent residents. A video of the discussion is embedded below.“
CBC News Politics, “ANALYSIS Ministers set scene in D.C. for Trudeau’s elusive meeting with Trump No sit-down scheduled for two leaders, but Liberal ministers have been busy sharing government’s message”
The New Yorker FB Live, “Our copy editor Andrew Boynton revises some recent remarks by Donald Trump.”
Via Yann LeCun (FB director of AI), The video of my talk at the Beneficial AI 2017 conference is available here:
Slides are here.
The conference tool place the first week of January in Asilomar, California. Speakers included Yoshua Bengio, Erik Brynjolfsson, Stuart Russell, Andrew McAfee, Jeffery Sachs, Demis Hassabis, Nick Bostrom and others, offering widely differing views on the future of AI, questions of ethics, and the possible impact of AI on society.
The audience had a high concentration of Silicon Valley royalty.
I also participated in a panel discussion on human-level AI, but the video has not been made available apparently.
[More info here ]
KOMU, “11-year-old Columbia inventor pitches prosthetic arm to Shark Tank panel”
Guardian, “Emma Watson: the feminist and the fairytale”
“Watson rejected the part of Cinderella, she has said, because the passive character didn’t “resonate” with her. But Belle is a more Hermione-ish heroine. In the original 1991 cartoon, she wasn’t content to do the housework with the help of some chirruping bluebirds: she strolled through town with her nose in a book. And Watson told Total Film magazinethat she had pushed the character even further from the traditional Disney doormat, so as to ensure that she is “the kind of woman I would want to embody as a role model”. She isn’t just Belle, but bell hooks. Never before has there been such continuity between an actress’s online persona and her two most iconic roles.
Of course, Watson is still playing a fairytale heroine in a film with “Beauty” in the title, so she isn’t exactly dismantling the patriarchy. “She’s a very useful figure for feminism, because she attracts people who might not be drawn to it in another form,” says Professor Diane Negra, the author of What a Girl Wants: Fantasising the Reclamation of Self in Postfeminism. “But she is a particularly palatable version of a feminist celebrity. She is a very glamorous and polished figure with all the markers of privilege. She is clearly not an activist of the old school.””
WaPo, “7 key take-aways from the court’s ruling on Trump’s immigration order”
“”The Government indeed asserts that it violates separation of powers for the judiciary to entertain a constitutional challenge to executive actions such as this one. There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.””
3. The court thinks that the states of Washington and Minnesota have actual harms they can sue over.
“Specifically, the States allege that the teaching and research missions of their universities are harmed by the Executive Order’s effect on their faculty and students who are nationals of the seven affected countries. These students and faculty cannot travel for research, academic collaboration, or for personal reasons, and their families abroad cannot visit. Some have been stranded outside the country, unable to return to the universities at all. The schools cannot consider attractive student candidates and cannot hire faculty from the seven affected countries, which they have done in the past.” […]
7. The court wouldn’t even give the government its fallback position — a modification of the earlier judge’s suspension of the ban.
“More generally, even if the [temporary restraining order] might be overbroad in some respects, it is not our role to try, in effect, to rewrite the Executive Order. The political branches are far better equipped to make appropriate distinctions. For now, it is enough for us to conclude that the Government has failed to establish that it will likely succeed on its due process argument in this appeal.”“