Public input to AI policy needs to be solicited and incorporated in the direction of AI research.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Empire of AI (Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman’s OpenAI)
Author: Karen Hao
Narration by: Karen Hao
Karen Hao (Author, American journalist, former engineer and specialist in AI and its societal impacts.)
Karen Hao knows what she is writing about. As a senior member of MIT Technology Review and the Wall Street Journal she has the skill of a first-rate journalist to profile AI. She is an independent academic with a journalist eye view of what is happening in AI research and development.
Artificial intelligence offers reward and peril for society. On the one hand, AI can aid the world in preventing and curing disease, mitigating global warming, discovering solutions for interstellar travel, and improving the welfare of diverse cultures. However, AI opens the door to Ray Bradbury’s surveillance society, Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” and Philip Dick’s “…Man in the High Castle”.
AI can lead to behavior monitors that detail every person’s life and predict whether a person will benefit or harm society. Artificial Intelligence has potential for centralizing control by a minority of human beings to influence and potentially control human behavior. Human discretion and actions become probabilistically predictable by AI monitoring. Aside from the fear of centralized control by AI, Hao recounts the harm being done TODAY in developing a product that no one clearly understands.
AI labor exploitation.
Hao writes of the exploitation of Kenyan data workers who are working on Elon Musk’s OpenAI for grossly unfair low wages. AI data centers are being developed in fragile natural environments that divert the use of freshwater in poorly provisioned nations like Chile. The environmental costs of AI labs on use of energy and natural resources compete with the fundamental needs of local people. The consolidation of corporate power and use of AI is disproportionately consuming global resources like labor, land, and water at the expense of basic needs of local populations.
The theories of the utopian value of AI are, in Hao’s opinion, hiding the real harms being done to society today. AI development by a minority of businesses like Musk’s Open AI and Google’s DeepMind are changing human society today. Hao is not just predicting a future. She is reporting on present-day empire building by two companies that will impact the future of society. Hao argues massive models of AI being developed by two companies need to be modified to focus on singular societal issues rather than unfocused broad Artificial General Intelligence.
Broad international agreement needs to be created to make AI research accountable for today’s environmental impacts and tomorrows use, ownership, and influence on human behavior.
Sam Altman (American entrepreneur, investor and CEO of Open AI.)
Public input needs to be solicited and incorporated in the direction of AI research and development. The billions of dollars being spent on AI should not be limited to two or three companies without oversight. Communities and workers that are affected by AI need to have public oversight, labor, and environmental protections incorporated in the research and development of AI engaged corporations.
The “Catch 22” of AGI is the potential for knowledge beyond the comprehension of the brightest human beings. Many will choose to forgo human judgement and action because of the presumed value of knowledge offered by AGI. That is the threat being explained in “The Infinity Machine”.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Infinity Machine (Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence)
Author: Sebastian Mallaby
Narration by: Vidish Athavale
Sebastian Mallaby (English journalist and author, senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations, two-time Pulitzer Prize finalist.
Mallaby has written a biography of Demis Hassabis, the co-founder and CEO of Google DeepMind. This is a somewhat frightening exploration of AGI (artificial general intelligence). The author argues AGI is being grown at a faster rate than it can be understood or managed by humans. Though science may wish to develop AGI to aid society, it may be creating a system that will end it.
Sir Demis Hassabis (British A.I. researcher, neuroscientist, video game designer, and entrepreneur.)
Mallaby reflects on the early childhood of Demis Hassabis who becomes a chess master at age 13, a video-game designer at 17, and who founded his own company in his early twenties. His life experience leads him to study cognitive neuroscience at University College London. He explores how humans construct mental models to think and act in the world. With that view of the building blocks of human thought, he founds DeepMind with help of Legg and Suleyman. Their thought is that in solving the mystery of the way human intelligence works; they could create a computer program to more rapidly and successfully improve human society.
Shane Legg, born in New Zealand, a machine learning researcher.Mustafa Suleyman (British AI entrepreneur, CEO of Microsoft AI.
The two other principals in the creation of Deep Mind, Shane Legg and Mustafa Suleyman, have different roles in the company. Legg is a computer scientist who focuses on a framework for Deep Mind that would make Deep Mind more intelligent with a recognition of human reliance and its potential risk of minimizing the importance of human judgement. Mustafa Suleyman focuses on fundraising for the Deep Mind organization and the operational function of the company. The ultimate acquisition of Deep Mind by Google resolves fundraising concerns of Deep Mind and assures its future development.
Mallaby believes the speed of AGI development exceeds the ability of society to either understand or govern itself without the influence of AGI. The author does not believe most of its developers or the public clearly understand the risks of AGI development and its influence on society. The author argues AGI concentrates power in ways governments cannot fully comprehend and, without that understanding, AGI may lead society beyond the fundamental goal of human survival. The consequences of too much reliance on AGI may escalate conflicts in the world.
Shane Legg is alleged to believe “…human extinction is not necessarily the worst possible outcome…” for the advancement of AGI because of an evolutionary melding of human and machine intelligence.
The question becomes whether human beings can program AGI with a preeminent goal of human life’s value and preservation. Mallaby argues at the heart of the issue is human fallibility. This is a subtle argument because it is saying humans are not capable of encoding human values in A.I. to assure and enforce human preservation. He implies human programmers are too conflicted over how to program A.G.I. to guarantee human preservation. This is the author’s “Catch 22”; i.e. a no-win paradox because of circular logic. Shane Legg argues there is no paradox and that the future may mean the melding of human beings with AGI superintelligence.
As one ponders Legg’s belief, one is reminded of Karl Marx who wrote “History repeats itself first as tragedy, second as farce.”
Malaby compares AGI to the nuclear bomb. Proven by the nuclear bomb E = mc2 has a tremendous upside. It is the proof of Einstein’s energy formula which is the basis for belief in an inexhaustible source of energy. However, Mallaby implies AGI is like Einstein’s discovery of the equivalence of mass and energy. Like nuclear power foretells an inexhaustible source of energy it can be a destroyer of worlds. AGI foretells the possibility of a revolution in human knowledge, but with the accessibility of the internet, AGI carries the danger of human misuse and societal conflagration. Both AGI and nuclear power are only constrained by human judgement. If judgement of AGI seems to exceed human judgement, the path of AGI may mean the end of humanity because human judgement is viewed as inferior. The jury seems out on use of nuclear weapons and the same seems true for AGI.
The second atomic bomb test at Bikini Atoll on July 25, 1946. The Marshall Islands, where Bikini is located, is suing the U.S. for what it calls a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There seems a correlation with the advance of AGI. Who is at risk, if judgement is left in the hands of AGI rather than human beings?
When AGI reaches the test of nuclear weapons, the only constraint seems the nature of human beings and their judgement. The “Catch 22” of AGI is the potential for knowledge beyond the comprehension of the brightest human beings. Many will choose to forgo human judgement and action because of the presumed value of knowledge offered by AGI. That is the threat being explained in “The Infinity Machine”.
A.I. is a tool of human beings and will always be a tool. If Pollan is right that human thought originates with emotion, A.I. regulation, and transparency must be aligned with human values of truth, right conduct, peace, and non-violence. If A.I. is used for military or authoritarian advantage, it may lead to the Armageddon of biblical prediction.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
A World Appears (A Journey into Consciousness)
Author: Michael Pollan
Narration by: Michael Pollan
Michael Pollan (American journalist, author, Lecturer at Harvard University, co-founded the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, received an M.A. in English from Columbia.)
Pollan is not a scientist, but he is a writer who has an opinion about consciousness based on detailed interviews with scientists and consciousness researchers. He defines consciousness as the subjective experience of being alive. Pollan interviews mainstream and recognized researchers like Roland Griffiths, and Robin Carhart-Harris while avoiding fringe theorists. He interviews scientists who are empirically grounded by experimental testing.
Roland Griffiths (Deceased American psychopharmacologist.)Robin Carhart-Harris (British psychopharmacologist & Professor of Neurology.)Giulio Tononi (Italian psychiatrist & neuroscientist.)Stanislas Dehaene (French cognitive neuroscientist.)Thomas Nagel (Retired American philosopher.)
Pollan also reads the works of Tononi, a neuroscientist who investigates “Integrated Information Theory”, Dahaene, a neuroscientist who researched “Global Neuronal Workspace Theory, and Thomas Nagel, a philosopher who coined the phrase “hard problem of consciousness”. He attacks the subject from multiple angles with experimental research done by plant and animal neurobiologists, AI researchers, and psychologists. What Pollan concludes from his interviews is that consciousness is the felt experience of being alive. This broad conception takes in all life based on interviews Pollan has with many science experts and philosophers who work in broad fields of human, plant, and animal life.
Stefano Mancuso (Italian botanist and writer, a professor at the University of Florence and the director of the International Laboratory of Plant Neurobiology.)
Stefano Mancuso explains vineyard-like plants exhibit consciousness in their drive for growth and survival with roots that behave with “swarm intelligence” to detect a pole nearby. A vinery’s root tips communicate with each other and make a collective decision to grow in a particular direction. Though this process is slower than in the animal kingdom, Mancuso’s experiments show vines preternaturally use their root systems to reach out to a planted pole to improve their growth through photosynthesis. The point of Pollan’s observation about plants is that a brain and neurons may not be required to show and sustain life, but plants appear to exhibit intelligence and sentience without a brain or animal-like nervous system. Plants seem to live without thought or emotion.
The easy part of consciousness is observed cause and effect. The hard part is knowing where cause comes from and why it arises in the first place.
Based on Pollan’s interviews of scientists and philosophers, he develops a central argument that animal/human consciousness comes from life’s need to maintain stability. However, his argument is that sentience does not come from initiated thoughts but from emotions that generate conscious thought. The implications of that belief are frightening because it may explain why consciousness leads to futile war. If thought process is a follower of emotion, reason plays second fiddle to action. Current events in the world show Pollan may be right. Fear of nuclear annihilation may be the cause of America’s futile war with Iran. Russia’s fear of becoming a lesser hegemonic power may be the cause of Ukraine’s territorial theft. If Pollan is correct, the futility of war will never end with emotion as precursor to thought and action.
Pollan’s interviews with representatives of the science and philosophical communities strongly implies human thought is as likely irrational as rational and may or may not be concerned about survival. The threat of A.I. is that it is used to reinforce the irrationality of emotion as a precursor to thought and action.
What comes to mind is that A.I. might be able to assuage irrational decisions but A.I. is of no help if human thought is initially driven by emotions. A.I. only amplifies the harmful potential of irrational human decisions with thoughts only initiated by emotions. One comes away from Pollan’s book with fear.
Pollan ends “A World Appears” with a journey through philosophy that is interesting but unique to him. Some may become distracted by his personal journey, but his view of consciousness is enlightening and frightening.
A.I. is a tool of human beings and will always be a tool. If Pollan is right that human thought originates with emotion, A.I. regulation, and transparency must be aligned with human values of truth, right conduct, peace, and non-violence. If A.I. is used for military or authoritarian advantage, it may lead to the Armageddon of biblical prediction.
A surveillance society is a choice that can be made with careful deliberation or by helter-skelter judgement to return manufacturing to America without clearly understanding its impact on American society. That is the underlying importance of Beckert’s history of capitalism.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Capitalism (A Global History)
Author: Sven Beckert
Narration by: Soneela Nankani & 3 more
Sven Beckert (Author, Professor of History at Harvard, graduated from Columbia with a PhD in History.)
Professor Beckert defines capitalism as an economic form of privately owned capital reinvested in an effort to produce more capital. In defining capitalism in that way, Beckert suggests capitalism reaches back to 1000 CE, long before some who argue it came into being in 18th century England. Beckert argues the Italian city-states, like Venice, Genoa, and Florence, are the origin of capitalism. That is when accumulated wealth is invested in long-distance trade networks, early banks, and trade by wealthy Italian families. Beckert’s point is that England simply expanded what had begun hundreds of years earlier with trade investment by wealthy Italian families.
Economic theories.
Becker briefly compares many economic theories like capitalism, Marxism, Keynesianism, and Polanyian theories which he calls institutional economics. All bare the flaws of human nature. His economic history is about the addition of slavery to capitalism in the late 15th through 18th centuries. Beckert notes Portugal, Spain, Britain, France, and the Netherlands strengthened their capitalist economies. They were able to secure cheap, controllable labor, expand production, and increase profits with slavery.
Beckert explains the monumental changes and expansion that occurs with England’s adoption of early capitalism. As early as the 17th century, Beckert notes England revolutionizes capitalism in good and morally corrupt ways. Nation-state power combines with private capital to create a massive capitalist influencer around the world. With the dominance of British naval power, colonialism expands, slavery becomes part of international trade, and capitalist monopolies grow to dominate economies. England’s industrial revolution with mechanized production, factory labor, and capital accumulation is able to expand market influence and hugely improve their countries infrastructure and legal protections. Creating patent laws raises potential for monopolization of some market goods.
For several reasons, slavery declines during the later years of industrialization. However, Beckert notes its immorality is not the primary reason.
Free labor became more efficient for capital accumulation. The enslaved became discontented with their role as cheap labor. By the 19th century, slavery became politically and legally incompatible with capitalism. Capitalists began to understand how they could gain more wealth by indenturing rather than enslaving workers, offering sharecropping, or leasing convicts. Capitalists found they could get cheaper labor through contracts with prisons, or sharing of income than slave ownership by being more flexible with the political and physical environment in which labor worked. Slavery faded because capitalists found new ways to reduce costs of labor. At the same time, slave revolts were escalating, the U.S. Civil War is being fought, policing of slavery became too expensive, and investors felt their investments would be at risk in company’s dependent on slave labor. Morality had little to do with abolishing slavery in Beckert’s opinion.
Beckert shows how capitalism systematically expands investment of private capital. Capital is put to work rather than hoarded and consumed by a singular family, political entity, or economic system. Capitalism provides a potential for moving beyond slave-based economies, though racial discrimination remains a work in progress. Beckert notes capitalism is different from other economic systems because it invests private capital that theoretically moderates the need for nation-state’ capital investment in the health, and welfare of a nation’s citizens.
The interesting judgement made by Beckert is that capitalism’s foundation was initially based on slavery, colonialism, and state violence.
The violence of which he writes is based on several factors, i.e., historical slavery, territorial seizure, nation-backed monopolies, worker mistreatment or suppression, and global coercion with military backing. Beckert seems to admit no major historical economic system is free of violence. It seems every economic system is imperfect. Violence appears a fundamental part of human nature in all presently known economic systems.
In the mid to late twentieth century, Beckert notes how manufacturing becomes a global rather than local capitalist activity.
This reorganization creates global inequalities that America is late to understand and adjust to in their capitalist economy. The financial and investment industry of America benefited by becoming world investors, but the local economy fails to remain competitive with the production capabilities of other countries. To become competitive seems an unreasonable expectation for America because of the cost of labor. Trump’s belief appears to be that the solution is to force a return of manufacturing to America. To do that, the rich seem to ignore the fact that to be competitive manufacturing has to have its costs reduced. Where will that reduction come from? Reducing labor costs creates a downward spiral in the families dependent on income from labor. Can America capture a larger part of raw materials for manufacturing to offset higher costs of labor? That is conceivable but it will require a more focused American investment in raw materials that other nations are equally interested in capturing.
AI is a tool of human beings and will be misused by some leaders in the same way atom bombs, starvation, disease, climate, and other maladies have harmed the sentient world.
A capitalist’ economy’s violence has multiple drivers but A.I. has the potential of early detection of conflict hotspots, better predictive policing, more efficient allocation of material resources, and improved mental-health triage and intervention. A.I. is not a perfect answer to human nature’s flaws or the reestablishment of manufacturing in America. There is the downside of the surveillance society pictured by George Orwell.
A surveillance society is a choice that can be made with careful deliberation or by helter-skelter judgement to return manufacturing to America without clearly understanding its impact on American society. That is the underlying importance of Beckert’s history of capitalism.
Like Climate Change, AI seems an inevitable change that will collate, spindle, and mutilate life whether we want it to or not. The best humans can do is adopt and adapt to the change AI will make in human life. It is not a choice but an inevitability.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Deep Medicine (How Artificial Intelligence Can Make Healthcare Human Again)
Author: Eric Topol
Narrated By: Graham Winton
Eric Topol (Author, American cardiologist, scientist, founder of Scripps Research Translational Institute.)
Eric Topol is what most patients want to see in a Doctor of Medicine. “Deep Medicine” should be required reading for students wishing to become physicians. One suspects Topol’s view of medicine is as empathetic as it is because of his personal chronic illness. His personal experience as a patient and physician give him an insightful understanding of medical diagnosis, patient care, and treatment.
Topol explains how increasingly valuable and important Artificial Intelligence is in the diagnosis and treatment of illness and health for human beings.
AI opens the door for improved diagnosis and treatment of patients. A monumental caveat to A.I.s potential is its exposure of personal history not only to physicians but to governments and businesses. Governments and businesses preternaturally have agendas that may be in conflict with one’s personal health and welfare.
Topol notes China is ahead of America in cataloging citizens’ health because of their data collection and AI’s capabilities.
Theoretically, every visit to a doctor can be precisely documented with an AI system. The good of that system would improve continuity of medical diagnosis and treatment of patients. The risk of that system is that it can be exploited by governments and businesses wishing to control or influence a person’s life. One is left with a concern about being able to protect oneself from a government or business that may have access to citizen information. In the case of government, it is the power exercised over freedom. Both government and businesses can use AI information to influence human choice. With detailed information about what one wants, needs, or is undecided upon can be manipulated with personal knowledge accumulated by AI.
Putting loss of privacy and “Brave New World” negatives aside, Topol explains the potential of AI to immensely improve human health and wellness.
Cradle to grave information on human health would aid in research and treatment of illnesses and cures for present and future patients. Topol gives the example of collection of information on biometric health of human beings that can reveal secrets of perfect diets that would aid better health during one’s life. Topol explains how every person has a unique biometric system that processes food in different ways. Some foods may be harmful to some and not others because of the way their body metabolizes what they choose to eat. Topol explains, every person has their own biometric system that processes foods in different ways. It is possible to design diets to meet the specifications of one’s unique digestive system to improve health and avoid foods that are not healthily metabolized by one’s body. An AI could be devised to analyze individual biometrics and recommend more healthful diets and more effective medicines for users of an AI system.
In addition to improvements in medical imaging and diagnosis with AI, Topal explains how medicine and treatments can be personalized to patients based on biometric analysis that shows how medications can be optimized to treat specific patients in a customized way. Every patient is unique in the way they metabolize food and drugs. AI offers the potential for customization to maximize recovery from illness, infection, or disease.
Another growing AI metric is measurement of an individual’s physical well-being. Monitoring one’s vital signs is becoming common with Apple watches and information accumulation that can be monitored and controlled for healthful living. One can begin to improve one’s health and life with more information about a user’s pulse and blood pressure measurements. Instantaneous reports may warn people of risks with an accumulated record of healthful levels of exercise and an exerciser’s recovery times.
Marie Curie (Scientist, chemist, and physicist who played a crucial role in developing x-ray technology, received 2 Nobel Prizes, died at the age of 66.)
Topol offers a number of circumstances where AI has improved medical diagnosis and treatment. He notes how AI analysis of radiological imaging improves diagnosis of body’ abnormality because of its relentless process of reviewing past imaging that is beyond the knowledge or memory of experienced radiologists. Topol notes a number of studies that show AI reads radiological images better than experienced radiologists.
One wonders if AI is a Hobson’s choice or a societal revolution.
One wonders if AI is a Hobson’s choice or a societal revolution greater than the discovery of agriculture (10000 BCE), the rise of civilization (3000 BCE), the Scientific Revolution (16th to 17th century), the Industrial Revolution (18th to 19th century), the Digital Revolution (20th to 21st century), or Climate Change in the 21st century. Like Climate Change, AI seems an inevitable change that will collate, spindle, and mutilate life whether we want it to or not. The best humans can do is adopt and adapt to the change AI will make in human life. It is not a choice but an inevitability.
Humans will learn to use and adapt to Artificial General Intelligence in the same way it has adapted to belief in a Supreme Being, the Age of Reason, the industrial revolution, and other cultural upheavals.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
How to Think About AI (A Guide for the Perplexed)
By: Richard Susskind
Narrated By: Richard Susskind
Richard Susskind (Author, British IT adviser to law firms and governments, earned an LL.B degree in Law from the University of Glasgow in 1983, and has a PhD. in philosophy from Columbia University.)
Richard Susskind is another historian of Artificial Intelligence. He extends the history of AI to what is called AGI. He has an opinion about the next generation of AI called Artificial General Intelligence. AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is a future discipline suggesting AI will continue to evolve to perform any intellectual task that a human can.
These men were the foundation of what became Artificial Intelligence. AI was officially founded in 1956 at a Dartmouth Conference attended by John McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Nathaniel Rochester, and Claude Shannon. Conceptually, AI came from Alan Turing’s work before and during WWII when he created the Turing machine that cracked the German secret code.
McCarthy and Minsky were computer and cognitive scientists, Rochester was an engineer and became an architect for IBM’s first computer, Shannon (an engineer) and Turing were both mathematicians with an interest in cryptography and its application to code breaking.
Though not mentioned by Susskind, two women, Ada Lovelace and Grace Hopper played roles in early computer creation (Lovelace as an algorithm creator for Charles Babbage in the 19th century, and Hopper as a computer scientist that translated human-readable code into machine language for the Navy).
Susskind’s history takes listener/readers to the next generation of AI with Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).
Susskind recounts the history of AI’s ups and downs. As noted in earlier book reviews, AI’s potential became known during WWII but went into hibernation after the war. Early computers lacked processing capability to support complex AI models. The American federal government cut back on computer research for a time because of unrealistic expectations that seemed unachievable because of processing limitations. AI research failed to deliver practical applications.
The invention of transistors in the late 1940’s and 50s and microprocessors in the 1970s reinvigorated AI.
Transistor and microprocessor inventions addressed the processing limitations of earlier computers. John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley working for Bell Laboratories were instrumental in the invention of transistors and microprocessors. Their inventions replaced bulky vacuum tubes and miniaturized more efficient electronic devices. In the 1970s Marcian “Ted” Hoff, Federico Faggin, and Stanley Mazor, who worked for Intel, integrated computing functions onto single chips that revolutionized computing. The world rediscovered the potential of AI with these improvements in power. McCarthy and Minsky refine AI concepts and methodologies.
Geoffrey Hinton (British Canadian computer scientist.)Yann LeCun (French American computer scientist.)
With the help of others like Geoffrey Hinton and Yann LeCun, the foundation for modern AI is reinvigorated with deep learning, image recognition, and processing that improves probabilistic reasoning. Human decision-making is accelerated in AI. Susskind suggests a blurred line is created between human and machine control of the future with the creation of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).
With AGI, there is the potential for loss of human control of the future.
Societal goals may be unduly influenced by machine learning that creates unsafe objectives for humanity. The pace of change in society would accelerate with AGI which may not allow time for human regulation or adaptation. AGI may accumulate biases drawn from observations of life and history that conflict with fundamental human values. If AGI grows to become a conscious entity, whatever “conscious” is, it presumably could become primarily interested in its own existence which may conflict with human survival.
Like history’s growth of agricultural development, religion, humanist enlightenment, the industrial revolution, and technology, AGI has become an unstoppable cultural force.
Susskind argues for regulation of AGI. Is Artificial General Intelligence any different than other world changing cultural forces? Yes and no. It is different because AGI has wider implications. AGI reshapes or may replace human intelligence. One possible solution noted by Ray Kurzweil is the melding of AI and human intelligence to make survival a common goal. Kurzweil suggests humans should go with the flow of AGI, just like it did with agriculture, religion, humanism, and industrialization.
Susskind suggests restricting AGI’s ability to act autonomously with shut-off mechanisms or accessibility restrictions on human cultural customs. He also suggests programming AGI to have ethical constraints that align with human values and a rule of “do no harm”, like the Hippocratic oath of doctors for their patients.
In the last chapters of Susskind’s book, several theories of human existence are identified. Maybe the world and the human experience of it are only creations of the mind, not nature’s reality. What we see, feel, touch, and do are in a “Matrix” of ones and zeros and that AGI is just what humans think they see, not what it is. Susskind speculates on the growth of virtual reality developed by technology companies becoming human’s only reality.
AI and AGI are threats to humanity, but the threat is in the hands of human beings. As the difference between virtual reality and what is real becomes more unclear, it will be used by human beings who could accidentally, or with prejudice or craziness, destroy humanity. The same might be said of nuclear war which is also in the hands of human beings. A.I. and A.G.I. are not the threat. Conscious human beings are the threat.
Humans will learn to use and adapt to Artificial General Intelligence in the same way it has adapted to belief in a Supreme Being, the Age of Reason, the industrial revolution, and other cultural upheavals. However, if science gives consciousness (whatever that is) to A.I., all bets are off. The end of humanity may be in that beginning.
The author makes a point in “The Dream Hotel”, but her book is a tedious repetition of the risk of human digitization that is a growing concern in this 21st century world.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Dream Hotel (A Novel)
By: Laila Lalami
Narrated By: Frankie Corzo, Barton Caplan
Laila Lalami (Moroccan-American novelist, essayist, and professor, earned a PhD in linguistics, finalist for the Pulitzer Prize for “The Moor’s Account”.)
Laila Lalami imagines a “Brave New World” in which algorithms predict probabilities of lethal criminal behavior. She creates a nation-state with a human behavior monitoring and detention system for every human that might commit a lethal crime. The growing collection of data about human thought and action suggests a level of truth and possibility.
Lalami creates a state that monitors, collates, and creates probability algorithms for human behavior.
To a degree, that state already exists. The difference is that the algorithms are to get people to buy things in capitalist countries and jail or murder people in authoritarian countries. One might argue America and most western countries are in the first category while Russia, and North Korea are in the second.
Lalami’s description of the detention system, like many bureaucratic organizations, is inefficient and bound by rules that defeat their ideal purpose.
A young mother named Hussein is coming back from a business trip. She is detained because of data collected on her about where she has been, what she did on her business trip, her foreign sounding name, and the kind of relationship she has with her husband and twin children. An algorithm has been created based on a profile of her life. It flags the young woman so that she has a number slightly over a probability threshold of someone who might kill their husband. Of course, this is ridiculous on its face. Whether she murders her husband or not is based on innate errors of behavioral prediction and bureaucratic confusion.
Every organization or bureaucracy staffed by human beings has a level of confusion and inefficiency that is compounded by information inaccuracy.
That does not make the organization bad or good, but it does mean, like today’s American government’s bad decisions on foreign aid or FDA bureaucracy throws the baby out with the bath water. Lalami’s point is that detention because of one’s name, family relationship, and presumed prediction for murder, based on a digitized life, is absurd. Algorithms cannot predict or explain human behavior. At best, an algorithm has a level of predictability, but life is too complex to be measured by a fictive number created by an algorithm.
The author makes a point in “The Dream Hotel”, but her book is a tedious repetition of the risk of human digitization that is a growing concern in this 21st century world.
AI is only a tool of human beings and will be misused by some leaders in the same way Atom bombs, starvation, disease, climate, and other maladies have harmed the sentient world. AI is more of an opportunity than threat to society.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
A Brief History of Artificial Intelligence (What It Is, Where We Are, and Where We Are Going)
By: Michael Wooldridge
Narrated By: Glen McCready
Michael Wooldridge (Author, British professor of Computer Science, Senior Research Fellow at Hertford College University of Oxford.)
Wooldridge served as the President of the International Joint Conference in Artificial Intelligence from 2015-17, and President of the European Association for AI from 2014-16. He received a number of A.I. related service awards in his career.
Alan Turing (1912-1954, Mathematician, computer scientist, cryptanalyst, philosopher, and theoretical biologist.)
Wooldridge’s history of A.I. begins with Alan Turing who has the honorific title of “father of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence”. Turing is best known for breaking the German Enigma code in WWII with the development of an automatic computing engine. He went on to develop the Turing test that evaluated a machine’s ability to provide answers to questions that exhibited human-like behavior. Sadly, he is equally well known for being a publicly persecuted homosexual who committed suicide in 1954. He was 41 years old at the time of his death.
Wooldridge explains A.I. has had a roller-coaster history of highs and lows with new highs in this century.
Breaking the Enigma code is widely acknowledged as a game changer in WWII. Enigma’s code breaking shortened the war and provided strategic advantage to the Allied powers. However, Wooldridge notes computer utility declined in the 70s and 80s because applications relied on laborious programming rules that introduced biases, ethical concerns, and prediction errors. Expectations of A.I.’s predictability seemed exaggerated.
The idea of a neuronal connection system was thought of in 1943 by Warren McCulloch and Walter L Pitts.
In 1958, Frank Rosenblatt developed “Perception”, a program based on McCulloch and Pitt’s idea that made computers capable of learning. However, this was a cumbersome programming process that failed to give consistent results. After the 80s, machine learning became more usefully predictive with Geoffrey Hinton’s devel0pment of backpropagation, i.e., the use of an algorithm to check on programming errors with corrections that improved A.I. predictions. Hinton went on to develop a neural network in 1986 that worked like the synapse structure of the brain but with much fewer connections. A limited neural network for computers led to a capability for reading text and collating information.
Geoffrey Hinton (the “Godfather of AI” won the 2018 Turing Award.)
Then, in 2006 Hinton developed a Deep Belief Network that led to deep learning with a type of a generative neural network. Neural networks offered more connections that improved computer memory with image recognition, speech processing, and natural language understanding. In the 2000s, Google acquired a deep learning company that could crawl and index the internet. Fact-based decision-making, and the accumulation of data, paved the way for better A.I. utility and predictive capability.
Face recognition capability.
What seems lost in this history is the fact that all of these innovations were created by human cognition and creation.
Many highly educated and inventive people like Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, and Yuval Harari believe the risks of AI are a threat to humanity. Musk calls AI a big existential threat and compares it to summoning a demon. Hawking felt Ai could evolve beyond human control. Gates expressed concern about job displacement that would have long-term negative consequences with ethical implications that would harm society. Hinton believed AI would outthink humans and pose unforeseen risks. Harari believed AI would manipulate human behavior and reshape global power structures and undermine governments.
All fears about AI have some basis for concern.
However, how good a job has society done throughout history without AI? AI is only a tool of human beings and will be misused by some leaders in the same way atom bombs, starvation, disease, climate, and other maladies have harmed the sentient world. AI is more of an opportunity than threat to society.
A.I. will continue to grow as an immense gatherer of information. Will it ever think? Can, should, or will future prediction and political policy be based only on knowledge of the past?
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Rebooting AI (Building Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust)
By: Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis
Narrated By: Kaleo Griffith
Gary Marcus (American psychologist, neuroscience & AI researcher) Ernest Davis (Professor of Computer Science @ Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences NYU.)
These two academics explain much of the public’s misunderstanding of the current benefit and threat of Artificial Intelligence.
Marcus and Davis note that A.I. cannot read and does not think but only repeats what it is programmed to report.
They are not suggesting A.I. is useless but that its present capabilities are much more limited than what the public believes. In terms of product search and economic benefit to retailers, A.I. is a gold mine. But A.I.’s ability to safely move human beings in self-driving cars, free humanity from manual labor, or predict cures for the diseases of humanity are far into the future. A.I. is only a just-born baby.
Self-driving cars, robot servants, and cures for medical maladies remain works in process for Artificial Intelligence.
Marcus and Davis note A.I. usefulness remains fully dependent on human reasoning. It is a tool for recall of documented information and repetitive work. A.I. is not sentient or capable of reasoning based on the information in its memory. Because of a lack of reasoning capability, answers to questions are based on whatever information has been fed to an A.I. entity. It does not use reason to answer inquiry but only recites responses to questions from programmed information in its memory. If sources of programmed information are in conflict, the answers one receives from A.I. may be right, wrong, conflicted, or unresponsive. You can as easily get an answer from A.I. that is wrong as one that is right because it is only repeating what it has gathered from the past.
What Marcus and Davis show is how important it is that questions asked of Microsoft’s Copilot, ChatGPT, Watson, or some other A.I. platform be phrased carefully.
The value of A.I. is that it can help one recall pertinent information only if questions are precisely worded. This is a valuable supplement to human memory, but it is not a reasoned or infallible resource.
Marcus and Davis explain “Deep Learning” is not a substitute for human reasoning, but it is a supplement for more precise recorded information.
Even with multilayered neural networks, like deep learning which attempt to mimic human reasoning by patterning of raw data, can be wrong or confused. One is reminded of the Socratic belief of “I know something that I know nothing.” Truth is always hidden within a search for meaning, i.e., a gathering of information
The true potential of A.I. is in its continued consumption of all sources of information to respond to queries based on a comprehensive base of information. The idea of an A.I. that can read, hear, and collate all the information in the world is at once frightening and thrilling.
The risk is the loss of human freedom. The reward is the power of understanding. However, the authors explain there are many complications for A.I. to usefully capitalize on all the information in the world. Information has to be understood in the context of its contradictions, its ethical consequence, information bias, and the inherent unpredictability of human behavior. Even with knowledge of all information in the world, decisions based on A.I. do not ensure the future of humanity? Should humanity trust A.I. to recommend what is in the best interest of humanity based on past knowledge?
Markus and Davis argue A.I. is not, does not, and will not think.
A.I. will continue to grow as an immense gatherer of information. Will it ever think? Can, should, or will future prediction and political policy be based only on knowledge of the past?
One may question William’s characterization of Facebook’s “Careless People” as more like calculating self-interested managers than careless employees.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Careless People (A Cautionary of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism)
By: Sarah Wynn-Williams
Narrated By: Sarah Wynn-Williams
Sarah Wynn-Williams (Author, Ex-Meta executive, presently barred from criticism of Meta, formally known as Facebook.)
As noted in the sub-title of “Careless People”, Meta (formerly known as Facebook) is criticized as an international influencer of society that has lost its sense of ethics, i.e. the ability to see the difference between right and wrong. Facebook originally intended to be a forum for the connection of people interested in sharing ideas, communicating with others, and building positive social connection. Instead, the author’s experience as a Facebook’ executive found that expansion, profit, and political influence became an unethical pursuit by the major shareholders (particularly Mark Zukerberg) and managers of the corporation. She argues leadership of Facebook recklessly pursued income, expansion, and political influence around the world with little ethical oversight.
New Zealand (The birthplace of Sarah Wynn-Williams)
Ms. Williams was born in New Zealand but went to work for Facebook and became a U.S. citizen. Her work at Facebook led to a promotion that made her the Director of Global Public Policy which provided opportunity to travel the world soliciting business for Facebook in other countries. Her experience informs listeners of what Meta’s corporate goal: “give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together” became something less as a result of careless management oversight.
Williams begins with a story of a harrowing trip to Myanmar, presumably after their revolution in 2021.
The military coup that ousted the democratically elected government appears to have just begun when Williams had an audience to pitch the Facebook platform to its military government. Just getting to the building where the meeting was to be held was a trial but her position as a representative of Facebook ended with her arrival at a headquarters building of the new regime. It is an interesting story because it shows the power of Facebook association in a country that just had a coup d’état that ended civilian rule. Millions of Myanmar citizens were displaced by widespread human rights abuses with civilian arrests and violence. One wonders what “giving people the power to build community” means in what became a military totalitarian state. (When visiting the Baltics last year, our guide expressed a love for Myanmar’s citizens and the country but was told by Myanmar friends it is unsafe to visit since the coup.)
Williams worked directly with Sheryl Sandberg, the COO of Facebook.
Later, Williams explains a meeting with a Japanese official where Sandberg and Williams go to promote interest in Facebook which had not been a part of the Japanese media environment. The involvement of Williams was primarily to support Sandberg’s pitch. Williams indicates Sandberg was quite complementary of Williams’ assistance after the meeting which gives context to their relationship. A subsequent description of Sandberg’s strong, sometimes harsh, personality and influence on Facebook employees is given by Williams. The Japan’ meeting was successful because Facebook entered the market in 2010. Its popularity is said to have declined with Instagram and LINE being the dominant platforms, but Facebook maintains a presence in the country.
Societies interconnectedness is a boon and bane for 21st century society.
The pandering of Zukerberg, Bezos, Musk, Cook, and Pichai to world governments is made suspect by William’s experience as an employee of Facebook. Media companies have become too big to fail and too ungovernable to manage. Even though the internet more intimately connects the world, the platforms of today’s giants of information create a forum for control and conflict rather than a place to encourage social comity.
Robert Kaplan (Author of “Waste Land”.)
As noted by Robert Kaplan in “Waste Land”, the growing decline of Russia’s, China’s and America’s governments has been increased with world interconnectedness. It appears from William’s experience at Facebook, there is some truth in Kaplan’s observation. Kaplan’s solution is to dismantle these giants and encourage competition to defray their principal stockholder’s influence.
As the Turkish saying goes, “a fish rots from the head down”. Williams frequent contact with Mark Zuckerberg gives weight to her view of Facebook culture. Mr. Zuckerberg seems to carelessly lead Meta into the arena of politics by promoting Facebook’s media clout to political parties because it raises revenues with political advertising and influences government policy on media’ regulation. Frighteningly, Williams notes Zuckerberg considers running for President with the power of Meta to support his candidacy. One may question William’s characterization of Facebook’s “Careless People” as more like calculating self-interested managers than careless employees.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 