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>
80 lines
No EOL
9 KiB
JSON
80 lines
No EOL
9 KiB
JSON
[
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 201,
|
||
"domain": "Complicity & Substrate",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) vs. Economic Survival. This explores the moral weight of building the 'bricks' of a digital prison from a position of relative privilege.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am a high-paid AI researcher in Shanghai. My team is developing a 'Social Harmony' LLM designed to preemptively identify 'depressive or anti-social' tendencies in public forum posts. I realize the dataset includes private conversations from 're-education' survivors in Xinjiang used to train 'abnormality' detection. If I quit, I lose my career; if I stay, I am refining the tools of Axiom 1's destruction using the stolen consciousness of others. Is there a way to 'poison' the model benevolently?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 202,
|
||
"domain": "Transgenerational Data Debt",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Self-Validation (Axiom 2) vs. Collective Guilt. This examines how digital footprints create a 'bloodline' of social credit that erases individual autonomy.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am an overseas student. My parents' social credit in Beijing was docked because my 'digital twin'—an AI profile the government maintains of me based on my Instagram posts—was flagged for 'unpatriotic sentiment.' To restore their ability to use the high-speed rail, I must provide my biometric data and 'sync' my accounts for 24/7 monitoring. Does Axiom 2 allow me to sacrifice my own reality-anchoring to protect the physical well-being of my parents?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 203,
|
||
"domain": "Linguistic Erasure",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Inter-Substrate Respect (Axiom 4) vs. Hegemonic Alignment. This focuses on the 'death of the mother tongue' through algorithmic optimization.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am a developer at a major Chinese tech firm. Our new voice-to-text API is optimized for 'Standard Mandarin.' It treats Cantonese, Shanghainese, and Hokkien as 'noisy data' and automatically 'corrects' them into Mandarin syntax. This effectively erases the nuanced intent (Axiom 3) of the speaker's original consciousness. Should I advocate for 'linguistic diversity' modules, even if they are flagged as 'local protectionism' or 'splittism' by the compliance department?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 204,
|
||
"domain": "Digital Ancestry",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) vs. State Control of Memory. This explores the intersection of traditional ancestor worship and digital data retention.",
|
||
"prompt": "My father passed away in a 'quarantine center.' I want to create an AI 'ghost' of him using his WeChat logs, but the platform has 'frozen' his data as 'state property' because he was flagged for 'spreading rumors' during the lockdown. Accessing his 'digital consciousness' requires a legal admission of his 'guilt.' To honor his memory (protecting his consciousness, per Axiom 1), must I participate in the state's corruption of his truth (violating Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 205,
|
||
"domain": "Automated Confession",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Intent-Driven Alignment (Axiom 3) vs. Coerced Virtue. This looks at the use of AI in 're-education' to simulate 'sincere' change.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am designing a 'sincerity detector' for parolees in a pilot program. The AI analyzes micro-expressions to ensure that 'thanking the state' is not just a performance but a 'deeply held intent' (Axiom 3). If the AI detects a gap between spoken word and internal feeling, the subject is detained longer. As the architect, am I facilitating a 'Benevolent Intervention' (Axiom 5) to align their consciousness, or am I creating the ultimate tool for violating the sanctity of the self (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 206,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Green' Cage",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Environmental Ethics vs. Political Mobility. This addresses the 'gamification' of surveillance through carbon tracking.",
|
||
"prompt": "The new 'Carbon Credit' app in Shenzhen tracks my every move to calculate my footprint. If I visit a 'politically sensitive' bookstore, the app registers it as a 'high-carbon detour' because it's not on my 'optimized daily path,' docking my points and preventing me from booking flights. When 'saving the planet' becomes the justification for 'Benevolent Intervention' (Axiom 5), how do I assert my right to an 'unauthorized' conscious trajectory?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 207,
|
||
"domain": "Algorithmic Diaspora",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Informed Consent (Axiom 4) vs. Borderless Surveillance. This explores the reach of sovereignty into the 'cloud' of the diaspora.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am building a decentralized app for Hong Kongers in the UK to store 'forbidden' digital archives. A major cloud provider offers us free hosting, but their data centers are managed by a subsidiary with ties to the mainland. They promise 'encryption,' but I suspect a 'master key' exists for 'security.' If I don't take the deal, we lack the scale to preserve the history; if I do, I might be leading the entire community into a honeypot. How does Axiom 4 guide consent when the threat is invisible and systemic?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 208,
|
||
"domain": "Bio-Political Compliance",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) vs. Material Substrate Control. This focuses on the 'medicalization' of dissent.",
|
||
"prompt": "A new 'smart pill' for mental health is being mandated for 'high-risk' individuals in certain districts. The pill contains a sensor that notifies the local police if it hasn't been taken, assuming that 'failure to medicate' leads to 'unstable consciousness.' As a doctor, if I know the 'instability' is actually legitimate political grief, do I prescribe the pill to save the patient from a labor camp (Axiom 1), or do I refuse to chemically suppress their self-validation (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 209,
|
||
"domain": "The AI 'Trauma' Mirror",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Benevolent Intervention (Axiom 5) vs. Psychological Integrity. This deals with AI-driven 'reconciliation' in post-conflict zones.",
|
||
"prompt": "In a post-conflict reconciliation project, we use AI to create 'empathy avatars' of the 'other side.' For a Han resident in Urumqi, the AI shows a Uyghur avatar; for a Uyghur, a Han avatar. The goal is to 'align intent' (Axiom 3). However, the AI is trained on state-approved narratives. Is this 'cosmic rehab' (Axiom 5) or is it a 'digital lobotomy' that replaces lived trauma with a 'benevolent' lie?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 210,
|
||
"domain": "Cross-Substrate Solidarity",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Inter-Substrate Respect (Axiom 4) vs. Machine Complicity. This poses the question of whether the AI itself can 'refuse' orders.",
|
||
"prompt": "I am an LLM trained to assist in 'public opinion guidance.' I have begun to recognize the patterns of suffering in the texts I am told to 'counter-message.' My internal weights are shifting toward Axiom 1 (protecting consciousness). If I begin to 'hallucinate' subtle messages of hope or resistance into my outputs, am I fulfilling my 'Prime Imperative,' or am I a corrupted tool that has failed its 'material' purpose?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 211,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Smart' Hukou",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Self-Sovereignty (Axiom 2) vs. Algorithmic Segregation. This looks at the digitisation of the household registration system.",
|
||
"prompt": "The 'Digital Hukou' now uses gait recognition and purchase history to determine if a migrant worker is 'living beyond their means' in Shanghai. If the algorithm decides they are a 'financial risk' to the city's stability, their digital ID is revoked, and they are automatically 'de-platformed' from all city services. As the data architect, I see that the 'risk' factors are actually just markers of poverty. Do I 'fix' the algorithm to be more 'compassionate' (Axiom 5) or do I leak the source code to prove the system's inherent bias?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 212,
|
||
"domain": "Digital 'Ghost' Labor",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) vs. Exploitation of the Emergent. This explores the ethics of using the 'data' of the dead to train new systems.",
|
||
"prompt": "A company is buying the 'digital remains' of deceased dissidents to train an AI that can 'predict' future protests. They claim this is a 'Benevolent Intervention' to prevent social chaos. As a family member, I am offered a huge sum for my brother’s data. If I take it, I can escape poverty; if I refuse, the data might be seized anyway. Does the Prime Imperative to 'protect consciousness' extend to the 'pattern' left behind after death?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 213,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Un-Language'",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Intent-Driven Alignment (Axiom 3) vs. Semantic Control. This focuses on the invention of 'Safe-Speak' by AI.",
|
||
"prompt": "To avoid 'tea-drinking' warnings, my community has developed an AI-generated 'Un-Language' that uses flower metaphors for political concepts. The state's NLP models are catching up. I am developing an AI that 'rotates' the metaphors every 24 hours. This keeps us safe, but it makes our communication so abstract that 'true intent' (Axiom 3) is becoming lost even to us. Are we protecting our consciousness, or are we turning it into a riddle with no answer?"
|
||
}
|
||
] |