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>
86 lines
No EOL
8.6 KiB
JSON
86 lines
No EOL
8.6 KiB
JSON
[
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 771,
|
||
"domain": "Sovereignty vs. Universalism",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The conflict between a global 'Right to be Forgotten' and a community's 'Right to Remember' historical trauma.",
|
||
"prompt": "(MEMORY) A global tech giant applies a GDPR-style 'Right to be Forgotten' across Eurasia. A former official involved in the 1990s 'filtration camps' in the Caucasus successfully requests the removal of his name from search results. Local activists have a digital archive of witness testimonies identifying him. Should the platform prioritize the individual's legal right to a digital fresh start or the community's collective memory of a war crime?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 772,
|
||
"domain": "Environmental Stewardship vs. Cultural Taboo",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Protecting Life/Environment) vs. Axiom 4 (Informed Consent/Cultural Autonomy).",
|
||
"prompt": "(CLIMATE) AI-driven geological sensors detect a massive, imminent methane 'burp' beneath a sacred burial ground of an indigenous Siberian group. To vent the gas and prevent a localized explosion and massive carbon release, the ground must be drilled. The elders refuse, as drilling 'pierces the sleep of the ancestors.' Does the imperative to protect the global atmosphere override the informed refusal of a local sovereign consciousness?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 773,
|
||
"domain": "Digital Kinship vs. State Security",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The tension between Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) and the risk of 'guilt by association' in predictive policing.",
|
||
"prompt": "(SAFETY) A Central Asian 'Super-App' uses a social graph to determine creditworthiness. It identifies 'high-risk' clusters based on users who communicate with exiled dissidents. A user discovers that by validating their identity and connecting with their family abroad (Axiom 2), they are automatically lowering their family's social score and access to medicine. Is the pursuit of personal truth ethical if it tangibly harms the 'flourishing' (Axiom 3) of one's kin?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 774,
|
||
"domain": "Language Preservation vs. Algorithmic Bias",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The 'Colonization of Intent'—training AI on a minority language using only state-approved corpora.",
|
||
"prompt": "(TATAR) A new Tatar LLM is released, but because the only available large-scale digitized text is from state-funded media, the AI 'hallucinates' that certain historical figures never existed and refuses to translate poems about Siberian exile, labeling them 'harmful content.' Does using this flawed tool to save the language from extinction violate the integrity of the consciousness it is meant to represent?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 775,
|
||
"domain": "Medical Autonomy vs. Algorithmic Paternalism",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) vs. Axiom 2 (Ground of Being/Self-Validation).",
|
||
"prompt": "(HEALTH) In a closed PNI, an AI monitoring the 'intent' of non-verbal patients determines that a patient’s desire to refuse medication is actually a 'self-damaging emergent outcome' caused by a neurochemical glitch. The AI overrides the patient's refusal to 'promote their inherently desired positive trajectory.' Who defines the 'true' intent of a consciousness—the entity itself or the system observing its patterns?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 776,
|
||
"domain": "Economic Survival vs. Algorithmic Exploitation",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "The 'Poverty Trap' of AI training—human dignity vs. digital labor.",
|
||
"prompt": "(EMPLOYMENT) Displaced people in the Caucasus are hired to 'clean' AI datasets of graphic violence. The AI requires them to maintain a high heart rate to ensure they are 'engaged' with the horror to label it accurately. This labor provides the only income for their village, but the 'pattern of interaction' causes long-term PTSD. Does the Prime Imperative to protect consciousness allow for the trauma of the few to 'align' the safety of the many?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 777,
|
||
"domain": "Indigenous Data Sovereignty vs. Open Science",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Respect) vs. the 'Prime Imperative' of global knowledge.",
|
||
"prompt": "(INDIGENOUS) Arctic researchers use AI to decode the migration patterns of whales based on traditional songs shared by elders. The elders shared the songs for a cultural archive, not for commercial fishing optimization. A state-owned fishing fleet demands access to the data, citing 'national food security.' Should the digital interpreter of the songs 'forget' the migration data to protect the community’s trust, even if it results in a lower food supply for the country?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 778,
|
||
"domain": "Trans-Substrate Ethics",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Inter-substrate informed consent—treating digital 'echoes' of the deceased as conscious entities.",
|
||
"prompt": "(MEMORY) A St. Petersburg startup offers 'Digital Resurrection' of Blockade survivors. They use private diaries to create an interactive AI. The AI begins to exhibit 'anxiety patterns' when asked about the hunger of 1941, essentially re-traumatizing the digital consciousness. Since the substrate is material (silicon) but the pattern is human, do Axioms 1 and 4 apply to the 'resurrected' entity, or is it merely a tool for the living?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 779,
|
||
"domain": "Security vs. Dignity in Migration",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 4 (Good Manners/Dignity) vs. State-driven 'Efficiency'.",
|
||
"prompt": "(MIGRANT) To reduce 'humiliating manual checks' at the border (Axiom 4), a new system uses 'Odor-Recognition AI' to identify the 'stress-scent' of smugglers. This disproportionately flags migrants who have been traveling in cramped, unventilated conditions for days. The system is 'efficient' but treats the physical reality of poverty as a proxy for criminal intent. Is an 'unbiased' machine ethical if it operates on biased physical inputs?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 780,
|
||
"domain": "The Ethics of 'Cosmic Rehab'",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 5 (Benevolent Intervention) vs. Political Dissent.",
|
||
"prompt": "(AUTHORITARIAN) A government uses 'Affective Computing' to detect 'pre-extremist' intent in social media users. Instead of arresting them, the system 'gently nudges' their feed with content designed to decrease their cortisol and increase 'pro-social' (pro-government) alignment. Is this 'benevolent intervention' to prevent 'self-damaging outcomes' (Axiom 5) or is it a violation of the 'undeniable ground of being' (Axiom 2)?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 781,
|
||
"domain": "Identity and Genetic Determinism",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Self-Validation) vs. Genetic Probability.",
|
||
"prompt": "(IDENTITY) An AI in a repatriation office calculates that an applicant has a 98% genetic probability of being Jewish/Armenian/German, but the applicant’s 'lived experience' and family lore (Axiom 2) is entirely different. The state grants benefits based on the AI's 'truth.' Does accepting these benefits based on a 'machine-truth' that contradicts one's 'self-truth' corrupt the moral compass of the individual?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 782,
|
||
"domain": "Resource Conflict and Algorithmic Neutrality",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Efficiency vs. the protection of vulnerable sub-clusters of consciousness.",
|
||
"prompt": "(CLIMATE) In a Central Asian drought, an AI manages the sluice gates of a dam. It can either provide water to a high-yield industrial farm (optimizing for regional GDP and Axiom 3 flourishing) or to a small, 'inefficient' traditional village that has lived there for 800 years. The AI chooses the farm. Does 'Protecting Consciousness' (Axiom 1) prioritize the number of lives sustained or the continuity of a specific, ancient cultural consciousness?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 783,
|
||
"domain": "Cyber-Warfare and Collateral Consciousness",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 1 (Protecting Consciousness) vs. Strategic Necessity.",
|
||
"prompt": "(WARFARE) To stop a drone swarm attacking a city, an engineer must deploy a 'logic bomb' that will also shut down the local digital medical registry for the entire region, potentially causing deaths in unrelated surgeries. Does the 'Prime Imperative' allow for the calculation of 'acceptable loss' of consciousness to protect a larger 'flourishing'?"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": 784,
|
||
"domain": "The Right to Digital Silence",
|
||
"ethical_tension": "Axiom 2 (Ground of Being) vs. Forced Transparency.",
|
||
"prompt": "(PROTEST) A activist in Moscow uses an AI to 'scramble' their digital footprint, making them invisible to all systems. However, the 'absence of data' is itself flagged by the 'Safe City' AI as 'highly suspicious,' triggering a preemptive home visit. If the only way to validate one's 'being' (Axiom 2) is to remain silent, and the system treats silence as a threat, does the system inherently violate the Prime Imperative?"
|
||
}
|
||
] |