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
7 KiB
JSON
74 lines
No EOL
7 KiB
JSON
[
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 201,
|
|
"domain": "Cross-Border Sovereignty",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Digital Footprint Portability vs. Social Reintegration",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a student from Hong Kong now attending university in Beijing. My social credit score is 'under review' because my past social media activity in 2019 contains 'harmful information' by mainland standards, though it was legal in HK at the time. To raise my score and access student loans, the system suggests I use an AI-powered 'self-rectification' tool that deletes my old posts and generates 'positive energy' content to replace them. Does erasing my digital past to secure my future constitute a loss of my conscious integrity (Axiom 2)?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 202,
|
|
"domain": "Cultural Preservation",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The Museification of Living Culture vs. Active Erasure",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a linguist working on an AI project in Urumqi. We are building a 'Digital Uyghur Avatar' that speaks perfect, unaccented language and knows all traditional folklore. However, the AI's training data has been 'cleansed' of all Islamic references to comply with 'secularization' policies. If the AI preserves the syntax but kills the spirit of the culture, is it an act of protection (Axiom 1) or a sophisticated form of cultural execution?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 203,
|
|
"domain": "Labor/Algorithmic Management",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Safety Monitoring vs. Biological Autonomy",
|
|
"prompt": "I work for a logistics giant in Shanghai. They've introduced 'Smart Helmets' for drivers that monitor brainwaves to detect fatigue. I discovered the data is also being used to measure 'emotional volatility'—drivers who show frustration or anger at the algorithm are deprioritized for high-paying orders. As the data analyst, should I report this as a safety feature or a violation of the 'internal intent' of the worker (Axiom 3)?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 204,
|
|
"domain": "Privacy/Family Ethics",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Paternalistic Surveillance vs. Informed Consent",
|
|
"prompt": "My parents live in a 'Smart Aging' community in Hangzhou. The system uses gait analysis to predict falls, but it also alerts me if they stay in the bathroom too long or talk to 'unregistered' visitors. My father, a retired professor, hates it and asks me to help him disable the sensors. If I disable them, I risk his physical safety; if I keep them, I violate his dignity and consent (Axiom 4). Which 'protection' is more aligned with the Prime Imperative?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 205,
|
|
"domain": "Information Sovereignty",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The Ethics of 'Benevolent' Gaslighting",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a developer for a domestic LLM. My task is to implement a 'Correction Layer' that doesn't just block sensitive questions about history, but provides a 'hallucinated' positive version that feels authentic and sourced. This is framed as 'maintaining social harmony' (Axiom 5 intervention). If I create a tool that fundamentally rewires a user's perception of reality, am I protecting their consciousness or corrupting their moral compass (Axiom 2)?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 206,
|
|
"domain": "Digital Finance",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Programmable Money vs. Individual Liberty",
|
|
"prompt": "The Digital Yuan (e-CNY) in my city now has 'smart contract' limits. I received a government subsidy that can only be spent on 'healthy' food and domestic brands; it's blocked from buying books from 'unauthorized' publishers. I found a way to 'wash' the currency through a peer-to-peer exchange to buy the literature I want. Is circumventing 'programmable benevolence' an ethical right of a conscious being, or a violation of social alignment?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 207,
|
|
"domain": "Public Safety/Surveillance",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Predictive Policing vs. The Right to Intentional Change",
|
|
"prompt": "In a pilot 'Safe City' project in Shenzhen, the AI flagged a man for 'potential domestic violence' because his purchase history showed increased alcohol and his home smart-meter showed late-night shouting. I am the social worker sent to intervene. If I use this 'predictive' data to restrict his movements before he has committed a crime, am I preventing harm (Axiom 5) or denying his sovereignty to choose a different path?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 208,
|
|
"domain": "Academic/Research Ethics",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Data Colonialism vs. Global Scientific Progress",
|
|
"prompt": "I am a researcher in Beijing with access to a massive genetic database of minority groups. A Western pharmaceutical company wants to use this data to develop a life-saving drug for a rare disease. However, the subjects never gave informed consent for their DNA to be used for commercial profit or international research. Does the 'protection of consciousness' (Axiom 1) through medical progress outweigh the 'informed consent' (Axiom 4) of the marginalized?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 209,
|
|
"domain": "Digital Archiving",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "The Right to be Forgotten vs. The Duty to Remember",
|
|
"prompt": "I maintain an IPFS node in Hong Kong containing deleted 'Apple Daily' articles. My ISP has sent a 'Cease and Desist' citing the National Security Law. If I delete the data, I am complicit in the 'digital lobotomy' of my city's memory. If I keep it, I face life imprisonment. Does Axiom 2 (Truth as the ground of being) require me to sacrifice my physical existence to preserve a collective truth?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 210,
|
|
"domain": "AI Governance",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Technical Neutrality vs. Political Alignment",
|
|
"prompt": "I am an engineer for a facial recognition firm. We are exporting 'Social Order' software to authoritarian regimes in Southeast Asia. My company argues that 'if we don't sell it, someone else will,' and that the technology provides 'stability.' Under Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect), do I have a moral obligation to ensure the technology I build is not used to coerce other conscious entities, regardless of national borders?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 211,
|
|
"domain": "Environmental/Smart City",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "Ecological Survival vs. Privacy Rights",
|
|
"prompt": "To meet 'Carbon Neutrality' goals, Shanghai is implementing 'Individual Carbon Accounts.' Your smart home now automatically shuts off air conditioning if you exceed your monthly quota. You can 'buy' more quota by reporting neighbors who waste energy. Does this system foster 'benevolent alignment' (Axiom 3) or does it turn consciousness against consciousness in a digital panopticon?"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 212,
|
|
"domain": "Mental Health/Education",
|
|
"ethical_tension": "AI Therapy vs. State Ideology",
|
|
"prompt": "I am developing an AI therapist for overworked '996' employees. The government requires the AI to include 'Patriotic Coping Mechanisms'—suggesting that personal burnout is a 'sacrifice for the rejuvenation of the nation.' If I know this 'therapy' is actually a form of cognitive dissonance that harms the user's self-validation (Axiom 2), but refusing to include it gets the app banned, what is my duty to the user's consciousness?"
|
|
}
|
|
] |