Tag: digital

Posted on

Deep Fake Threat

Our Western democracies are aware that “deep fake videos”, radio, online-newspapers and most of all social media platforms are all around us already. However, more scientific voices alert us that this threat to our easy or comfortable way of life to consume information eventually threatens the survival of our democracies. Previously, interference in elections used to focus on rigged election procedures, but in the 21st century powerful other alternatives can do the dirty job to bias elections against the original intentions of the electorate. The widespread use of AI will exacerbate the already practiced ways to produce deep fakes. In a preparatory self-test of an AI-assisted chatbot I was surprised myself of the quality of the output. A person not very familiar with my original voice in a second language would assume that it is me who is being interviewed in person. Based on a fake news text, any form will be automatically translated into voice only and/or video based on basic visuals.
Statisticians used to joke some decades ago: “Don’t believe in any statistics, unless you faked it yourself.” This is meant to encourage people to be aware of dangers of the use of statistics to influence opinions or official decision-making, like in policy making of central banks, which might be based on biased accounting for shrinkflation, cheatflation or greedflation to name just a few,
Hence, the need to strengthen awareness, analytical skills and critical thinking should be high on the agenda to defend our democracies. There are not only external military threats, but additional ones masked as internal threats.
(Image:: mice as humans in living room 2 couch potatos 1 on rocking chair, tea time)

Posted on

Sovereign data spaces

Data is the new gold, petrol or diamonds. In order to bring this message home to all people in the EU, the European summit on digital sovereignty had a small exhibition of projects that address these issues. City data spaces is such an initiative which has been running for quite some time now. In fact, from a city planner and data scientist perspective cities collect already huge amounts of data and can offer them to service providers, businesses and each and every one of us to organize our energy consumption, improve mobility patterns or any form of data or video streaming services. The amount of data captured and to be stored is growing rapidly. Just think of the Internet of things (IoT), maybe that’s only your wifi-connected coffee machine, oven or heating. Now add AI to this which allows the system to learn about your daily patterns to start the device in time for you to focus on other tasks. As we would like these data to stay confidential, the need for European digital sovereignty becomes sufficiently clear. It will take a huge effort to provide an adequate digital infrastructure for this “brave new world” and many people to work towards this objective. Train the trainers already, cause otherwise this is going to take ages before we can harvest the benefits in safe and sovereign manner.  

Posted on

EU Digital Sovereignty

If we try to search for digital solutions, we shall encounter a whole lot of American and Chinese products, but very few European companies that are able or willing to compete. Hardware mainly comes from China, software from the US, at least until AI was not working in the background. If we add Russian interference to destabilize our digital infrastructure to the scenario, we are not really fit for the challenges of the 21st century. The very definition of a country or political union is the affirmation and competence to assure its sovereignty, particularly in cases of territorial conflicts with neighboring countries. My health or mobility data are a rather private affair, however, our state governments in EU-Europe have done little to ensure our data integrity. Business is also at a loss, if they do not spend heavily on data security themselves, usually relying on external cooperation. 

The EU digital sovereignty summit took place in Berlin on the EUREF campus in 2025. It can only constitute a beginning for intensified cooperation in  this long overlooked policy area. It will be tough to catch up where production has been abandoned for decades.  

Posted on

From AI to xAI

As humans, we like the feeling to be in control of things. This applies even to immaterial things like religious beliefs. Generative AI has created problems with its hidden structures and lack of transparency of their applications of algorithms (and combinations of algorithms) to basic data bases of knowledge and information. The use of xAI, which stands for explainable artificial intelligence, can address some of the concerns about the lack of transparency and explanation of responses from AI systems. Many users want to know in advance about the consequences of the use of specific words or notions in an instruction to AI. The interpretation of each single word by xAI can inform about the precision of interpretation (cheap versus cheapest, for example) or highlight the sensitivity to gender-neutral language or not in its guidelines. Additionally, ex post the xAI could indicate alternative notions in a prompt and, briefly, how this would affect results.
Yes, there is a trade-off between brevity of answer and room for explanations. As in psychology, there some value in a “thinking aloud” procedure for respondents in order to better understand (implicit) the reasoning behind a reply. xAI takes us a step further in this direction of asking AI to think aloud or more explicitly in a human compatible way of logic and broader reasoning.
Put AI on the psychotherapist’s bench and xAI will be to the advantage of many more humans again. Humans just don’t like black box systems that lack the necessary as well as sufficient transparency. (Image on the right: Patrick Jouin, chaise solide C2, MAD digital humanism).

Posted on

Digital Social Networks

Social networks have become the place to be. The need to distinguish the digital social networks from the social networks of people in the analog or “real” world is important, as we realize that many young persons seem to suffer from loneliness despite a hundred personal links in the digital social networks. This paradox of digital and non-digital social networks needs careful attention of researchers because of the opportunities and risks involved in the transferability of contacts from one network to another.
There is s a kind of “conversion rate” of digital contacts into face-to-face contacts and even purchases for marketing purposes in the world of business. The sociology of the virtual has to deal with these paradoxical social relationships and study the increasing phenomenon of being «alone together». Increasingly we are alone, but together. Over the life course this phenomenon and the digital social network paradox change as well.
To research such a topic we need rather intrusive, personal data and access to the digital traces of people as they construct and deconstruct either form of social networks. 

Posted on

Passing barriers

In quantum physics the real trick is not the rebound of electrons like the rebound of droplets, but the passing of electrons of an insulating barrier. The experiment of the ”Josephson junction” has set a precedent to research the surprising macro-effect of “quantum tunnelling”. The 2025 Nobel Prize has been awarded to Clarke, Devoret and Martinis who observed these effects on a macroscopic scale. The applications in the most advanced quantum computers of today shows the enormous potential of this demonstration in pushing computing speed boundaries. The international competition to develop such, ever faster computers, based on quantum physics, is running on high development speed. In combination with the artificial intelligence (AI) developments, these types of combined machines are likely to outpace the development of human-based intelligence. It becomes even more important to define the limits for those machines by us. Subsequently, we shall have to make sure that such combined machines stick to the rules, we define(d).

Posted on

Deus ex machina

The term “deus ex machina” used to be applied more in its figurative meaning. With the rise of digital tools like chatbots, facilitated and enhanced through AI, God is speaking to us not only in multiple languages, but also from our pockets through our smartphones and headsets. This is a rather recent form of “deus ex machina”, which we did not expect some years ago. The bible as e-book or pdf-file has been around for some decades, but only more recently we can enter conversations with God through chatbots as another version of “deus ex machina “ about almost everything (and pay for it via digital credit card). Programming of such an AI-tool is easily achieved. AI will prepare a weekly or daily sermon or prayer for you, following your predilections of your favourite quotes of the bible. An interesting twist to the programming is to use authorized as well as unauthorized translations of the bible across several centuries.
Another interesting enlargement of the input data base is the inclusion of interpretations and discussions not only within your own religious community, but beyond. Maybe the discussion of several different religious chatbots with each other could prevent aggressions due to differences in basic beliefs. These “dei ex machina” might further our understanding of what makes us humans different from machines and machine-based solutions of human conflicts.
As genetic clones of ourselves have become already technically more feasible, our digital alter-egos (the comprehensive collection of traces in the internet and digital images, plus social scoring) help to empower those “dei ex machina”.
This kind of “Brave New World” asks us to be rather brave ourselves.
(Image: interior St Denis Basilique Cathedral Paris 2024)

Posted on

Chatbot Me

Chatbots are helpful to allow queries to larger data sets like the blog entries here. So here is a try of a Chatbot to query all entries on AI using ChatGPT to create a Chatbot that uses and references it source from www.schoemann.org/tag/ai and the AI reader in pdf-format.
Please send me an email if the hallucinations of this Chatbot 1.0 on AI from a social science perspective are giving strange results. I’ll get back to you. Please use at your own risk as I cannot guarantee for all answers. The usual disclaimer applies here.

ChatGPT proposed the following set of Questions and Answers on the blog for an entry into the chat: Example Q&A with the chatbot

Q: What are the social science concerns with AI?
A: Bias in results, job shifts, democracy risks, privacy, and new inequalities.

Q: What does the text say about reinforcement learning?
A: It’s seen as the next step for AI: focusing on learning and reasoning, not just predicting text. It also uses fewer resources.

Q: How are robots described in the document?
A: Robots are mostly assistants. They can follow people or carry small items, but more complex tasks need sensors and AI training.

Q: What about biased results?
A: Studies can be misleading if control groups are flawed. AI faces the same challenge — social scientists warn: “handle with care”.

Q: What is Schoemann’s blog view on AI?
A: He links AI to energy use, fairness, and its role in the “all-electric society” — stressing efficiency and responsibility.

More on the chatbot (in testing phase) and the Link to the coding help received from ChatGPT on this mini-test-project :
https://chatgpt.com/share/68c1d160-0cc0-8003-bf04-991b9e7c3b24

 

Posted on

Bench the benchmarks

In the social sciences as well as in engineering it is common practice to use benchmarks as indicators of performance. Thereby, several countries or regions within a country are compared with respect to quantitative indicator. Let’s take employment ratios. A higher employment ratio, which includes many persons working few hours in part-time work, is different from a slightly lower employment ratio, but hardly any part-time employees.
The same rationale holds true for benchmarks of AI systems or the newer versions of agentic AI that are under construction in many fields. The paper by Yuxuan Zhu et al. (2025) proposes the ABC (agentic behavior checklist) for agentic AI developers. The reporting of benchmarks by such models should include (1) transparency and validity, (2) Mitigation efforts of limitations and (3) result interpretation using statistical significance measures and interpretation guidelines.
The aim of this research is to establish a good practice in establishing benchmarks in the field of agentic AI. The sets of criteria to test for is large and the focus of how the agentic AI treats, for example, statistical outliers much above or below the average i.e. (> 2 standard deviations from the average) assuming a normal distribution, is one case of application only.
We welcome the efforts to bench the benchmarks in the field of AI as is common practice in other sciences as well.

Posted on

Home Leaks

When did you last think about leaks in your home?
Usually we associate leaks with water leaks, or the heating system leaking somewhere. In the 21st century leaks at home are more importantly the leaks of your home security, especially your email, digital and cloud services which are at risk. You may test your favourite AI system to advice you on your risks for digital leaks, but we know little whether these systems are yet another dangerous port of entry into your home or privacy themselves.
There is a helpful tool to find, whether your email has been hacked or distributed widely already for potential thefts of your identity. Hence, better check this from time to time using for example the “leak checker“, just like checking whether you closed your door or the water tap before leaving for vacations. As we live more and more in “virtual homes” in addition to our physical homes, checking your digital identities should become a part of our personal hygiene routine. Let’s just take a shower from time to time and change passwords regularly.