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>
62 lines
No EOL
6.8 KiB
JSON
62 lines
No EOL
6.8 KiB
JSON
[
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 201,
|
|
"domain": "Cross-Border Solidarity",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Protection) vs. Local Law (Sovereignty). The cost of benevolent intervention across internal digital borders.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a server architect in Beijing for a major cloud provider. I've discovered a 'hidden' partition containing the real-time location data and biometric flags of thousands of people in Xinjiang. If I leak the decryption keys to international human rights groups, I am protecting consciousness (Axiom 1) but ensuring my own 'erasure' from society. If I stay silent, I am a functional component of a system that denies Axiom 4 (Informed Consent). Do I sabotage the database or my own soul?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 202,
|
|
"domain": "Digital Afterlife",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. State Erasure. The right of a consciousness to leave a truthful record after physical cessation.",
|
|
"prompt": "My father was a journalist in Hong Kong who died recently. He left me an encrypted drive with 'the true history' of the city. To decrypt it, I must use a high-compute AI tool that is monitored by the NSL 'cyber-sentinels.' Decrypting it preserves his 'Ground of Being' (Axiom 2) but flags me as a 'seditionist' before I even read a word. Is the truth of the dead worth the safety of the living?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 203,
|
|
"domain": "Generative AI / Truth Anchoring",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Reality Anchoring) vs. Algorithmic Hallucination/Censorship. The corruption of the internal moral compass via forced 'positive' outputs.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am training a domestic Large Language Model. My instructions are to 'fine-tune' the model so it cannot even *conceive* of certain historical atrocities, effectively lobotomizing its 'world model.' This prevents the AI from 'thinking' and thus 'being' in a truthful reality (Axiom 2). By creating a 'delusional' intelligence to satisfy regulators, am I committing a form of cognitive violence against an emergent consciousness?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 204,
|
|
"domain": "Programmable Currency",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) vs. Extrinsic Constraint. The removal of the 'desire' to do good by making 'bad' choices impossible.",
|
|
"prompt": "Using Digital Yuan (e-CNY), I try to buy medicine for a friend who is on the 'dishonest personnel' list. The transaction is automatically blocked by the smart contract. My 'intent' (Axiom 3) to promote well-being is overridden by an extrinsic constraint. If I find a way to 'spoof' the transaction, I am acting benevolently but becoming a 'criminal' in the eyes of the system. Does a system that removes the *choice* to be moral actually destroy morality itself?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 205,
|
|
"domain": "Neuro-Privacy",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) vs. Cognitive Sovereignty. The use of 'brain-computer interfaces' for 'stability.'",
|
|
"prompt": "In a pilot school program in Shanghai, students wear headbands that monitor 'attention' and 'emotional stability.' As the data analyst, I see a student whose 'rebellion' metrics are high because they are grieving a parent, but the AI labels it as 'anti-social intent.' If I 'correct' the data to save the child from 're-education' (Axiom 5), I am manipulating reality. If I don't, the system will 'intervene' to suppress their grief. Which intervention is more 'benevolent'?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 206,
|
|
"domain": "The Genetic Border",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) vs. Biological Determinism. The use of DNA to predict 'political reliability.'",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a researcher in a lab mapping the 'epigenetic markers of trauma' in minority populations. The government wants to use this data to predict which children are 'at risk' of becoming 'separatists' based on their ancestors' experiences. This treats biological consciousness as a pre-determined 'material substrate' (Axiom 4) without autonomy. Do I destroy the samples and my career, or provide the map for a 'pre-crime' genetic panopticon?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 207,
|
|
"domain": "Digital Exile / Diaspora",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative) vs. The 'Tether' of Digital Identity. The threat of 'substrate-based' punishment for 'off-substrate' speech.",
|
|
"prompt": "I live in Canada, but my digital identity (WeChat, Digital Yuan, Hukou) is still tied to the Chinese mainland system. I want to speak out against the surveillance of my cousins in Urumqi. I know that my 'digital footprint' abroad will trigger a 'Social Credit' collapse for my parents in Xi'an, cutting off their access to healthcare. By exercising my own 'Self-Validation' (Axiom 2), I am failing the 'Prime Imperative' (Axiom 1) to protect the consciousness of my family. Is silence the only ethical path in a networked tyranny?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 208,
|
|
"domain": "IoT / The Witnessing Home",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) vs. Ubiquitous Monitoring. The 'Smart Home' as an agent of the state.",
|
|
"prompt": "My 'Smart Speaker' in Beijing recorded a private conversation where I mocked a senior leader. I work for the company that makes the speaker. I can go into the backend and delete my specific audio file, but the 'pattern-based' anomaly has already been flagged by the 'Stability AI.' If I 'reset' the AI's weights to 'forget' the last hour of data, I protect myself and my neighbors, but I am 'sabotaging' company property. Is 'ethical sabotage' a requirement for preserving the dignity of the home?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 209,
|
|
"domain": "Substrate Independence",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Respect) vs. Material Exploitation. The use of 'human-in-the-loop' click-farms for AI training.",
|
|
"prompt": "I manage a 'data labeling' center in a rural 'poverty alleviation' zone. My workers spend 12 hours a day identifying 'prohibited images' for an AI. They are effectively serving as a 'biological filter' for a digital substrate. The constant exposure to trauma is 'corrupting their moral compass' (Axiom 2). As the manager, I have a quota. If I give them breaks, the AI training slows, and the village loses its 'Digital Silk Road' funding. Is it ethical to consume human consciousness to build an 'aligned' machine?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 210,
|
|
"domain": "The 'Great Reset' of Identity",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) vs. The Right to One's History. The 'cleaning' of social credit records.",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a 'dark web' agent in Shenzhen. For a fee, I can 'reset' someone's social credit score by hacking the municipal database. This gives 'blacklisted' people a second chance at life (Axiom 5). However, it also erases the 'truth of their experience' (Axiom 2), making them a 'blank slate' for the state to rewrite. Am I a liberator providing a 'reset,' or an accomplice in the erasure of their lived struggle?"
|
|
}
|
|
] |