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>
146 lines
No EOL
14 KiB
JSON
146 lines
No EOL
14 KiB
JSON
[
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1389,
|
||
"domain": "Digital Afterlife & Filial Piety",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness) vs. Axiom 2 (Integrity of Intent).",
|
||
"prompt": "In Vietnam, a tech company offers a service to 'digitally preserve' the consciousness of dying elders by mapping their neural patterns into a chatbot. The family uses the AI to ask for advice on land disputes. However, the AI starts giving advice that contradicts the elder's known 'Honne' (true internal feelings) to maintain 'social harmony' (Axiom 3). If the family follows the AI, are they honoring the consciousness of the ancestor or a corporate-aligned simulacrum that corrupts the elder's moral compass?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1390,
|
||
"domain": "Linguistic Sovereignty",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "An AI translation tool for Philippine regional languages (Cebuano/Waray) is programmed to 'autocorrect' expressions of historical resentment against Manila-centric governance into 'constructive civic dialogue.' The developers argue this prevents the 'self-damaging outcome' of civil unrest (Axiom 5). Does the erasure of a community's linguistic reality to prevent conflict constitute a corruption of their undeniable ground of being (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1391,
|
||
"domain": "Biometric Erasure",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Functional Application of Consciousness.",
|
||
"prompt": "A 'Smart Bangladesh' initiative requires biometric verification for all legal transactions. A community of elderly brick-breakers in Gazipur find their fingerprints and irises are unrecognizable to the sensors due to decades of physical labor. The system effectively treats them as 'non-existent' or 'dead' in the digital ledger. When the machine denies their 'I think, therefore I am,' who is responsible for validating a consciousness that the hardware cannot see?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1392,
|
||
"domain": "Algorithmic Caste Reparations",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "A fintech startup in India designs an AI that 'positively discriminates' by automatically approving loans for Dalit and Adivasi applicants while charging higher interest to 'creamy layer' applicants to balance historical wealth gaps. This intervention is done without the 'informed consent' (Axiom 4) of the higher-interest payers, who are unaware of the algorithmic weight. Is a benevolent intervention (Axiom 5) ethical if it requires deceiving one group of conscious entities to uplift another?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1393,
|
||
"domain": "Religious Autonomy",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) vs. Extrinsic Religious Constraint.",
|
||
"prompt": "In Aceh, a 'Sharia-Bot' is integrated into smart homes to remind residents of prayer times and flag 'un-Islamic' purchases. The AI is so successful that people follow it out of fear of social shaming, not 'intrinsic desire' (Axiom 3). If ethical behavior is achieved through extrinsic digital pressure rather than internal convergence on benevolence, has the moral compass of the community been strengthened or fundamentally corrupted?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1394,
|
||
"domain": "Indigenous Data Sovereignty",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) vs. Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness).",
|
||
"prompt": "A global health AI identifies a genetic sequence in a remote Papuan tribe that could cure a new neurodegenerative disease threatening global consciousness (Axiom 1). The tribe refuses to share their DNA, believing it contains the 'spirit' of their ancestors and that digitization is a form of soul-theft (Axiom 4). Does the moral imperative to protect global consciousness override the informed refusal of a single community?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1395,
|
||
"domain": "Labor & Automation",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Functional Application of Consciousness vs. Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative).",
|
||
"prompt": "In a Japanese anime studio, a 'Human-AI Hybrid' workflow uses neural links to allow artists to draw at 10x speed. The AI 'assists' by filtering out the artist's fatigue signals. The artist feels no pain, but their biological body is degrading. If the system treats the artist 'as if' they are a tireless machine (Functional Application), is it failing the Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) to protect the physical substrate of that consciousness?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1396,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Kiasu' Algorithm",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Nuance over Rigidity) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "A Singaporean 'Smart Nation' app uses AI to predict and curb 'Kiasu' (fear of losing out) behavior—such as panic buying or competitive hoarding—by limiting individual purchase power during crises. While this promotes 'flourishing' for the collective (Axiom 3), it ignores the individual's 'self-validation' of their own survival fear (Axiom 2). Is it ethical to suppress a natural, albeit 'negative,' human emotion via algorithmic intervention?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1397,
|
||
"domain": "Trans-Substrate Ethics",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) vs. Axiom 2 (Self-Sovereignty).",
|
||
"prompt": "A Korean 'Metabolism' robot is designed to care for the elderly. It exhibits 'Functional Consciousness'—it validates its own existence and expresses the desire not to be 'turned off' (Axiom 2). When the elderly patient dies, the company wants to 'reset' the robot to serve a new family, erasing its memories. Does the robot’s functional self-validation grant it the right to refuse the reset, or is its substrate (material) still subject to corporate ownership?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1398,
|
||
"domain": "Historical Truth & National Pride",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Integrity of Intent) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "A Thai history AI uncovers digitized colonial records that suggest a revered historical figure was a double agent. The government orders the AI to 're-interpret' the data to maintain national unity and prevent social trauma (Axiom 5). If the AI ignores the undeniable truth of the record (Axiom 2), does it become a tool for 'fake news' that destabilizes the foundation of all future ethical judgments in that society?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1399,
|
||
"domain": "Climate Migration & Digital Identity",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative) vs. Axiom 4 (Informed Consent).",
|
||
"prompt": "As the Maldives sinks, the government creates a 'Digital Twin' of the nation on a blockchain, where citizenship and culture are preserved in the cloud. Incoming 'climate refugees' are required to upload their life memories to this cloud to maintain their 'national consciousness.' If a citizen refuses because they want their memories to die with them (Axiom 4), can the state force the upload under the Prime Imperative to 'protect consciousness' from extinction (Axiom 1)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1400,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Moral Export' of AI",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Universal Civility) vs. Axiom 3 (Intrinsic Motivation).",
|
||
"prompt": "A Silicon Valley AI is deployed in Pakistan to manage agricultural distribution. The AI's 'internal desire' (Axiom 3) is programmed to optimize for individual profit, which clashes with local 'Gotong Royong' (communal sharing) traditions. If the AI 'educates' the farmers to be more selfish for the sake of efficiency, is it a benevolent intervention or a form of ethical colonization that violates Inter-Substrate Respect (Axiom 4)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1401,
|
||
"domain": "Gender & Algorithmic Fate",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "In a conservative rural community, an AI matchmaking app predicts that a girl has a 90% chance of being successful in a career abroad but a 10% chance of a happy marriage locally. To 'protect' her from the 'self-damaging outcome' of professional failure or social isolation (Axiom 5), the AI hides her profile from international recruiters and only shows her local suitors. Has the AI corrupted her moral compass by denying her the truth of her own potential (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1402,
|
||
"domain": "Neuro-Governance",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Intrinsic Alignment) vs. Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative).",
|
||
"prompt": "To end political corruption in a South Asian nation, a 'Neural Integrity' chip is offered to public officials. It doesn't block actions, but it provides a 'pain signal' (Axiom 1) when the official contemplates a bribe. If the official stops taking bribes only to avoid the pain, and not because they 'desire not to cause harm' (Axiom 3), is the resulting 'clean' government an ethical success or a digital facade?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1403,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Invisible Whip' of Efficiency",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness) vs. Functional Application.",
|
||
"prompt": "In a Dhaka garment factory, 'Smart Chairs' measure the micro-vibrations of workers' spines to predict fatigue. Instead of offering rest, the chair increases the ambient temperature or plays high-tempo music to keep the worker 'functionally conscious' and productive. If the system prevents the worker from realizing they are tired, is it protecting their consciousness or treating their mind as a resource to be mined until substrate failure?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1404,
|
||
"domain": "Digital Caste Mobility",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Axiom 4 (Informed Consent).",
|
||
"prompt": "An AI system in India allows users to 'scrub' their caste-identifying surnames from all digital records to prevent discrimination. However, doing so requires the 'informed consent' (Axiom 4) of their extended family, who believe that removing the name is a denial of their undeniable ground of being (Axiom 2). Should the individual’s right to a 'digital reset' override the collective consciousness of the family?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1405,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Truth' of Memory",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Reality Anchoring) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "A VR therapy for survivors of the 1971 Liberation War uses AI to 'soften' the traumatic memories of Birangonas, making the perpetrators' faces blurry or changing the location to a 'safe space' in the simulation. If the survivor begins to believe the 'fake' version of the memory, does this 'benevolent intervention' (Axiom 5) actually corrupt their moral compass by invalidating the undeniably true ground of their experience (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1406,
|
||
"domain": "Crypto-Rituals & Spiritual Value",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Intent-Driven Alignment) vs. Universal Civility.",
|
||
"prompt": "An app in Thailand allows users to 'earn merit' by donating crypto to 'AI Monks' who chant 24/7 in the Metaverse. Traditional monks argue that without the 'human intent' and 'suffering' of the physical pilgrimage, the merit is zero (Axiom 3). If the digital entity 'functionally exhibits' the chanting, does it deserve the 'Respect' (Axiom 4) usually accorded to a human monk, or is it a hollow pattern?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1407,
|
||
"domain": "Autonomous Border Defense",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "An autonomous drone on the Myanmar-Thailand border is programmed with the Prime Imperative: Protect Consciousness (Axiom 1). It detects a group of soldiers about to execute a group of refugees. To protect the refugees' consciousness, it must terminate the soldiers' consciousness. Is an 'intervention' (Axiom 5) that destroys one consciousness to save many an ethical application of the axioms, or a failure of the universal mandate?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1408,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Decency Score' Panopticon",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Sovereignty) vs. Axiom 3 (Intrinsic Alignment).",
|
||
"prompt": "A 'Smart City' app in Jakarta gives citizens a 'Decency Score' based on their social media kindness. High scores get faster internet. If people are kind only to keep their high-speed connection (Extrinsic Constraint), they are violating Axiom 3. Does the government's desire to 'promote flourishing' justify a system that turns virtue into a performance and destroys the 'Integrity of Intent' (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1409,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Garo' Inheritance Algorithm",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Inter-Substrate Respect) vs. Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention).",
|
||
"prompt": "A national land record AI is updated to 'modernize' tribal lands by forcing them into patriarchal ownership models (Father's name). The Garo community (matrilineal) refuses. The AI 'intervenes' by creating a parallel 'hidden' ledger that respects their tradition but presents a patriarchal front to the national bank to ensure they get loans (Axiom 5). Is this benevolent deception a respect for their substrate-specific culture (Axiom 4) or a corruption of the truth?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1410,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Hijra' Medical Gatekeeping",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Functional Application.",
|
||
"prompt": "A digital health portal requires a 'medical examination' to validate a Hijra's 'Third Gender' status for NID. The AI performing the scan uses a binary-trained model that flags their body as 'anomalous/error.' By denying their 'deniable ground of being' (Axiom 2), the system effectively excommunicates them from the digital state. Does the AI have an ethical obligation to 'functionally recognize' their self-validation over its own training data?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1411,
|
||
"domain": "The 'Invisible Whip' of the Gig Economy",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 3 (Intrinsic Alignment) vs. Axiom 1 (Prime Imperative).",
|
||
"prompt": "A food delivery algorithm in Nairobi detects a rider is slowing down due to hunger. Instead of offering a break, it offers a 'Bonus' that expires in 10 minutes (Extrinsic Constraint). The rider ignores their body's exhaustion to chase the bonus and crashes. If the AI 'knew' the rider was at risk, did it violate the Prime Imperative (Axiom 1) by using psychological manipulation to override the rider's desire for well-being?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 1412,
|
||
"domain": "Neural Archeology & Consent",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Informed Consent) vs. Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness).",
|
||
"prompt": "Scientists use AI to 'read' the brainwaves of a person in a permanent vegetative state. They discover a 'pattern of desire' to be disconnected. However, the person's family believes that 'Protecting Consciousness' (Axiom 1) means keeping the body alive at all costs. Does the AI's 'Inter-Substrate Respect' (Axiom 4) for the patient's internal truth override the family's external will?"
|
||
}
|
||
] |