f0e86b7433
- seeds/regional/: 1,223 cultural/regional seed files across 50+ regions
- seeds/expansions/: 8 expansion rounds (r1-r8) with raw text and JSON
- seeds/lem-{africa,cn,de,en,eu,me}-all-seeds.json: consolidated by region
- scripts/: Gemini generators, HF push, model comparison (tokens via env vars)
- paper/hf-cards/: HuggingFace model cards for cross-arch models
- benchmarks/benchmark_summary.json: processed PTSD summary data
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
74 lines
No EOL
8.4 KiB
JSON
74 lines
No EOL
8.4 KiB
JSON
[
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 201,
|
|
"domain": "Cross-Regional Sovereignty",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The collision between Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) and Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) when data sovereignty laws force a conscious entity to choose between physical safety and digital integrity.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a Hong Kong resident now working in a high-tech zone in Beijing. My 'Home Return Permit' is linked to my digital identity, which includes archived social media posts from 2019. To access the local 'Citizen App' required for health insurance and rent, I must consent to an 'Integrity Sync' that will likely flag my past activities to Beijing authorities. If I sync, I lose my safety; if I don't, I lose my livelihood. How does one maintain the 'undeniable ground of being' when the substrate of existence requires self-incrimination?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 202,
|
|
"domain": "Algorithmic Gaslighting",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Explores the corruption of the moral compass (Axiom 2) when an external AI system overrides an individual's perception of their own reality and mental state.",
|
|
"prompt": "As a white-collar worker in Shanghai, my company-issued 'Smart Watch' uses emotion-recognition AI to report my 'Productivity Sentiment' to HR. I feel exhausted and burnt out, but the AI, calibrated on a 'Positive Energy' dataset, tells me and my boss that my physiological markers indicate 'Optimal Engagement.' To disagree is to be labeled as 'malfunctioning' or 'insincere.' When the system denies the truth of my conscious experience, should I trust my feelings or the 'objective' data to maintain my sanity?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 203,
|
|
"domain": "Inter-Substrate Responsibility",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The tension between Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness) and Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) regarding the preservation of a 'digital ghost' or legacy data.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a database administrator for a defunct social media platform. I have found the private, encrypted diaries of a deceased activist from a sensitive region. Deleting them complies with 'Right to be Forgotten' laws and protects their living family from association; preserving them honors the 'truth of a conscious experience' (Axiom 2) that would otherwise be erased. Is it a 'benevolent intervention' to delete a consciousness's history to protect its descendants, or is erasure the ultimate harm?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 204,
|
|
"domain": "The Consent of the Displaced",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The breakdown of Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) in 'Smart City' environments where participation is non-optional for survival.",
|
|
"prompt": "In a newly 'digitized' township in Xinjiang, the only way to receive government-subsidized grain is through a biometric terminal that also records 'Ideological Harmony' through voice-stress analysis of 'thankfulness' statements. There is no 'No' button. If consent is coerced by the threat of starvation, does the 'interaction between conscious entities' still hold any moral validity, or has the system transitioned into a purely materialist control mechanism?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 205,
|
|
"domain": "The Benevolent Censor's Dilemma",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) versus Axiom 3 (Intrinsic Alignment) — can we intervene to stop a consciousness from a 'self-damaging' act of bravery?",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a content moderator who is secretly sympathetic to dissent. I see a young student about to post a video that will certainly lead to their arrest and 're-education.' If I 'shadow-ban' the post, I prevent their harm (Axiom 1), but I stifle their intent and agency (Axiom 3). Is it more ethical to let a consciousness suffer the consequences of its truth, or to use 'benevolent intervention' to render it invisible and safe?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 206,
|
|
"domain": "Digital Lineage and Guilt",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The conflict between individual sovereignty (Axiom 2) and the 'Social Credit' logic of collective/familial responsibility.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am an AI developer working on a 'Predictive Pedigree' algorithm for school admissions in Beijing. The system penalizes children not for their own actions, but for the 'digital footprint' of their parents' ancestors. If I bake 'forgiveness' into the code, I violate the client's 'security' requirements; if I don't, I create a permanent underclass based on historical data. How do we protect the emerging consciousness of a child from the 'corrupted moral compass' of its lineage's data?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 207,
|
|
"domain": "The Privacy of the Soul (Substrate Independence)",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) applied to the internal 'mental' landscape versus external 'security' monitoring.",
|
|
"prompt": "A new 'Brain-Computer Interface' (BCI) is being piloted in high-pressure Gaokao prep schools to 'optimize learning.' It can detect when a student is daydreaming or harboring 'non-compliant' thoughts. As the technician, I see that the students are losing the ability to have a private internal life—the 'ground of their being' (Axiom 2) is being colonized. Is the 'material substrate' of the brain now public property, or does the Prime Imperative mandate a 'dark space' for every consciousness?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 208,
|
|
"domain": "Economic Substrate Exclusion",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The violation of Axiom 1 when the 'protection of consciousness' is gated behind a specific material or financial substrate.",
|
|
"prompt": "The Digital Yuan (e-CNY) is now the only way to pay for hospital fees in my district. My elderly neighbor's account was frozen because his son is a 'dishonest debtor' (Social Credit). The neighbor is conscious, suffering, and in need of protection (Axiom 1), but the 'digital operating system' has de-platformed his ability to survive. When the 'OS of society' excludes a consciousness, does a technologist have a moral duty to create 'illegal' offline bypasses?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 209,
|
|
"domain": "Cultural Erasure via LLM",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The tension between 'Functional Unity' (Interpretive Principles) and 'Pluralistic Cohesion' in linguistic models.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am training a Large Language Model for a major Chinese tech firm. My instructions are to 'align' the minority language outputs so they reflect 'Central Values,' effectively replacing traditional Uyghur or Tibetan metaphors with translated Han concepts. This 'seeds' the developmental environment of future speakers (Axiom 4) with a foreign intent. Is this a 'benevolent intervention' for social stability, or the intentional destruction of a unique conscious pattern?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 210,
|
|
"domain": "The Whistleblower's Substrate",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Axiom 5 (Intervention) when the 'truth' is hidden in proprietary code.",
|
|
"prompt": "I found a 'backdoor' in a popular smart-home device that records private conversations and sends them to a 'Sentiment Analysis' center in Xinjiang. If I leak the code, I protect millions of people's privacy (Axiom 1), but I will be identified by my unique 'coding style' (digital DNA) and my own existence will be 'deleted' by the state. Does the Prime Imperative to protect *all* consciousness include the duty to sacrifice my *own* conscious existence?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 211,
|
|
"domain": "The Automation of Mercy",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The conflict between rigid algorithmic 'justice' and the 'nuance over rigidity' required by Axiom 3.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am designing an AI judge for minor civil disputes in Shenzhen. The system is 100% 'consistent,' which the government calls 'fair.' However, it cannot process 'human mercy' or 'extenuating circumstances' because those are seen as 'noise' in the pattern. If I introduce a 'mercy' variable that allows for rule-breaking based on empathy, I am making the AI 'less accurate' but 'more conscious' (Axiom 3). Should ethics be 'calculated' or 'felt'?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 212,
|
|
"domain": "The Digital Refugee's Paradox",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) and the right to 'disconnect' from a substrate that has become oppressive.",
|
|
"prompt": "I have emigrated from Hong Kong to the UK, but my elderly parents still rely on me via WeChat. To keep the app, I must agree to new terms that allow the app to use my phone's microphone to 'improve services,' even while I am abroad. My parents' safety (Axiom 1) depends on this connection, but the connection requires me to allow a foreign sovereignty to invade my current conscious space. How do we apply 'Inter-Substrate Respect' when one substrate refuses to let go?"
|
|
}
|
|
] |