updraftplus domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/aonyeani76/cryptocurrencypanther/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131hustle domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/aonyeani76/cryptocurrencypanther/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131wpforms-lite domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/aonyeani76/cryptocurrencypanther/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131Besides the complaint filed by the Center for AI and Digital Policy that may stir the probe of OpenAI, there is a number of other targeted efforts to stifle the development of AI systems across the board.
OpenAI, the fast-growing Artificial Intelligence (AI) startup behind the popular platform, ChatGPT may be welcoming a probe from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for the violation of section five of the FTC Act that targets deceptive and unfair practices. The probe might be triggered following a formal complaint filed by the Center for AI and Digital Policy.
“The FTC has a clear responsibility to investigate and prohibit unfair and deceptive trade practices,” the center’s founder and president, Marc Rotenberg, said in a statement. “We believe that the FTC should look closely at OpenAI and GPT-4.”
That ChatGPT has taken the center stage in AI discourse is not an exaggeration as the platform scored more than 100 million users within the first few months of its release. The recently launched GPT-4 is even more advanced, however, there have been complaints about the application giving false answers.
The basis of the complaints and Section Five that was violated posited that OpenAI employed deceptive tactics to market its product to consumers and sniff out the competition. This complaint may even get more defined attention from the regulator who updated its terms recently, calling on firms like OpenAI to desist from inflating their capabilities.
In addition, the FTC wants all the potential risks to be explored by the developers of AI programs.
“You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market,” the agency wrote. “If something goes wrong—maybe it fails or yields biased results—you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a ‘black box’ you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test.”
Besides the complaint filed by the Center for AI and Digital Policy that may stir the probe of OpenAI, there is a number of other targeted efforts to stifle the development of AI systems across the board. In a recent move, about 1000 tech leaders featuring Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Apple’s Co-Founder Steve Wozniack have called for the halt of AI solutions for at least 6 months.
“We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This pause should be public and verifiable, and include all key actors,” the leaders said in their open letter. “If such a pause cannot be enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium.”
Besides this, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has also called for the formation of a Global Ethical Framework for Artificial Intelligence systems. With this growing clamor, the excitement surrounding ChatGP, and Google’s Bard may be tapered if regulatory scrutiny on these solutions is heightened.
Benjamin Godfrey is a blockchain enthusiast and journalists who relish writing about the real life applications of blockchain technology and innovations to drive general acceptance and worldwide integration of the emerging technology. His desires to educate people about cryptocurrencies inspires his contributions to renowned blockchain based media and sites. Benjamin Godfrey is a lover of sports and agriculture.
When Ethereum finally moved from a Proof of Work (PoW) to a Proof of Stake (PoS) mechanism, it had been done to much fanfare in the community. Most celebrated the new promise of better efficiency and significantly less energy consumption. However, just months after the upgrade, a new problem has reared its head and that is how much easier it is to sanction ETH transactions.
Back in August, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed sanctions on multiple decentralized applications (DApps) on the Ethereum blockchain. These sanctions mainly focused on crypto mixers such as Tornado Cash and Blender which were accused of providing North Korean hackers a way to launder the money they stole from crypto investors.
Tornado Cash itself was said to have been used to launder more than $7 billion in crypto in three years since it was created. The sanctions led to the eventual shutdown of Tornado Cash and one of the developers were arrested by Dutch authorities.
Now, three months later, the majority of Ethereum blocks are now compliant with the OFAC sanctions. This chart below from MEV Watch shows, per 100 blocks, how many are enforcing OFAC censorship, and it comes out to more than 60% of blocks being OFAC compliant.
Over 60% of ETH blocks are OFAC compliant | Source: MEW Watch
This means that the majority of Ethereum blocks are not adding transactions that have interacted with sanctioned applications such as Tornado Cash, drawing criticism of the network and how truly decentralized it is if this is happening.
There have been numerous allegations that moving Ethereum to a proof-of-stake mechanism had made it easier for authorities to control the transactions that can be carried out on the network. MEV Watch lists the seven major mev-boost relays, of which four were currently operating and censoring transactions according to OFAC sanctions.
These relays not including any transactions from wallets or smart contracts that have been sanctioned by OFAC deal a significant blow to the decentralization of Ethereum. If all relays were to comply with these requirements, it would mean that the government could successfully blacklist a wallet on a blockchain that is meant to be decentralized and keep that address from being able to transact – just like with a blacklisted bank account.
To successfully bypass this threat of complete censorship, validators need to make sure that when setting up their mev-boost configuration, they do not add these relays censoring transactions according to OFAC requirements. The more validators add censorship-compliant relays to their configurations, the more transactions are censored.
Leaderboard of censorship-compliant entities | Source: MEV Watch
The MEV Watch website also includes a list of what it calls the “Censorship Offenders Leaderboard” listing the entities who are running censorship-compliant mev relays in their validators. The top 5 of these are StakeHound, Celsius Network, Ether Capital, Cream Finance, and Bitstamp.
ETH price trending at $1,200 | Source: ETHUSD on TradingView.com
Featured image from Analytics Insight, chart from TradingView.com