Artificial Intelligence seems to be very much on the minds of a great many people these days. Financial-minded people seem to think it’s going to make more people (especially THEM) what used to be called “filthy” rich. Manufacturers seem to think that they won’t need to waste time (and/or MONEY) on fallible human employees, who make too many mistakes and/or get sick, and/or need time off to care for children or parents, etc. It seems widely believed that AI is going to replace the need for humans altogether (except, perhaps) for a VERY few who may be needed to supervise entire manufacturing plants, etc.). Then, everyone will be rich & famous, and there will be NO problems in the world!
I’m sorry, but I don’t see the likelihood of this actually happening. Even if we don’t consider the tremendous upheaval & great suffering such unemployment would, in fact, bring. And, even IF we did achieve this late 40’s/early 50’s, “B” grade Sci-Fi movie utopian nightmare, I have grave doubts that anything towards achieving greater overall joy and happiness would be likely for anyone. And, since there would be no need for education, science, learning, etc., the odds seem high that the limited number of people who remained would just be bored to death be unable to actually SOLVE problems which hadn’t been conceived of before, and would probably die out fairly quickly, leaving the Earth to whatever animals MIGHT survive, IF the machines that people had invented didn’t manage to kill them off as “unnecessary.”
Now, I’m not really as pessimistic as this may sound. I DO use technology to an extent (I wrote this on my Mac mini M2 Pro computer). I DO tend to use my iPad to assist me in managing my life, and I DO use my iPhone for some things which I find useful. I, obviously, use the Internet, cable tv, and even dabble with “streaming” services, and I have found them to be of some use. However, I remember with affection the days when we had fewer Radio & TV stations, but they were required by law to meet the “Equal Time” standards in ALL political (News) coverage, regulations which vanished with the decline of the use of the “Public” airwaves which justified them. Their abandonment allowed the splintering of the total audience into separate groups among multiple “channels” which tend to provide only that information which is “selected” by “survey watchers” (AI?) that IT has “decided” is their “target audience” wants to hear (and to which they will assign a “truthfulness” rating which may well not have much, if any, relationship to actual facts).
I was raised, and trained, to examine the best information available, consider how it relates to the situation, then reach decisions based on as well-reasoned judgements as I am capable of making, based on that process! Does that mean I don’t ever make mistakes? No, but at least I haven’t just relied on some algorithm (created by some (possibly/probably prejudiced PERSON [or computer code] to decide what information I will be allowed to consult by including only that information/opinion which has been designated as the most desirable (by someone else) for me to have access to as the “CORRECT” info.
The reasoning which led me to this position (aside from my traditional, academic education) is my own experience. For example, how many people have had experiences, as I have, which are understandable only by accepting the following statement?
I’m sorry, but I don’t see the likelihood of this actually happening. Even if we don’t consider the tremendous upheaval & great suffering such unemployment would, in fact, bring. And, even IF we did achieve this late 40’s/early 50’s, “B” grade Sci-Fi movie utopian nightmare, I have grave doubts that anything towards achieving greater overall joy and happiness would be likely for anyone. And, since there would be no need for education, science, learning, etc., the odds seem high that the limited number of people who remained would just be bored to death be unable to actually SOLVE problems which hadn’t been conceived of before, and would probably die out fairly quickly, leaving the Earth to whatever animals MIGHT survive, IF the machines that people had invented didn’t manage to kill them off as “unnecessary.”
Now, I’m not really as pessimistic as this may sound. I DO use technology to an extent (I wrote this on my Mac mini M2 Pro computer). I DO tend to use my iPad to assist me in managing my life, and I DO use my iPhone for some things which I find useful. I, obviously, use the Internet, cable tv, and even dabble with “streaming” services, and I have found them to be of some use. However, I remember with affection the days when we had fewer Radio & TV stations, but they were required by law to meet the “Equal Time” standards in ALL political (News) coverage, regulations which vanished with the decline of the use of the “Public” airwaves which justified them. Their abandonment allowed the splintering of the total audience into separate groups among multiple “channels” which tend to provide only that information which is “selected” by “survey watchers” (AI?) that IT has “decided” is their “target audience” wants to hear (and to which they will assign a “truthfulness” rating which may well not have much, if any, relationship to actual facts).
I was raised, and trained, to examine the best information available, consider how it relates to the situation, then reach decisions based on as well-reasoned judgements as I am capable of making, based on that process! Does that mean I don’t ever make mistakes? No, but at least I haven’t just relied on some algorithm (created by some (possibly/probably prejudiced PERSON [or computer code] to decide what information I will be allowed to consult by including only that information/opinion which has been designated as the most desirable (by someone else) for me to have access to as the “CORRECT” info.
The reasoning which led me to this position (aside from my traditional, academic education) is my own experience. For example, how many people have had experiences, as I have, which are understandable only by accepting the following statement?
It helps if you imagine
auto correct as a tiny
little elf in your phone
ho’s trying so hard to
be helpful but is in fact
quite drunk.
auto correct as a tiny
little elf in your phone
ho’s trying so hard to
be helpful but is in fact
quite drunk.
The problem here, of course, is that YOU still have to know what is actually correct in order to decide if the AI (autocorrect) process is, in fact, making a good choice. One only has to watch the news for a few days to encounter situations where either the “reporter” doesn’t know the most accurate word to use, or the script she/he has been given has been “auto-corrected” into a stupid mistake, so the teleprompter (and/or the written script) provides poor (even incorrect) word choices for the news reader to report on the air. I rather liked this Shoe cartoon which seems to suggest that we might now need to wish for self-correcting printers to cross-check the “auto-correct” word processing systems.
Now, It isn’t really fair to say that I am completely opposed to what is referred to as AI. I just am aware (as, I think most people are at this point, if they are honest) that AI is really not yet (and may well NEVER be) a good substitute for human knowledge and judgement. People are capable of many strange, often wonderful, thoughts, ideas, artistic objects, etc. I don’t see that much has been yet achieved by AI except for faster access to what “the algorithm” (which someone decided should make your decisions for you) has selected. What I think this actually means is that, at THIS time, more often than not, what we call AI gives us entirely too much of what is suggested in this Non Sequitur (which, logically, leads to the reaction expressed out of the frame).
I would suggest that far too much of what is referred to as AI is, in fact, created primarily for the purpose of marketing or building our dependence on our “devices” to an even greater extent at the expense of our just paying attention to the world around us and/or using our own brains. Here are some (in my opinion) somewhat amusing examples to consider.
This sign was, undoubtably, created long before anything one might even consider the existence of anything approaching AI became a meaningful concept, let alone a part of our lives, but I think it still provides a worthwhile warning, even though some people would like to think that it’s a bit outdated:
This sign was, undoubtably, created long before anything one might even consider the existence of anything approaching AI became a meaningful concept, let alone a part of our lives, but I think it still provides a worthwhile warning, even though some people would like to think that it’s a bit outdated:
In spite of this observation, I am willing to accept that AI, even in its current state, MIGHT have some practical uses, as suggested by this cartoon from Zits:
On the other hand, Aunty Acid suggests that the current forms of AI MAY not provide a complete solution to anything like all of the problems which one may encounter in life.
After all, we have yet to even approach having AI systems which can actually DO very much., So, while they MIGHT provide reasonably good information some, even MUCH, of the time, they do not (at least yet) seem to be able to actually SOLVE many of the difficulties and challenges which one encounters in life.
After all, we have yet to even approach having AI systems which can actually DO very much., So, while they MIGHT provide reasonably good information some, even MUCH, of the time, they do not (at least yet) seem to be able to actually SOLVE many of the difficulties and challenges which one encounters in life.
I guess that this is what concerns me the most about what they insist on calling “Artificial Intelligence.” It seems to me that AI is, mostly, a system for speeding up access to and sorting through whatever set of information it consults. And, as far as I can tell, “Large language models” DO NOT & (probably) CAN NOT include access to the complete range of unbiased and scientifically authenticated sources! (Also known as “the best, accurate information.”)
Nor are they ever likely to be able to make “judgements” based on values, preferences, emotions, etc. After all, they ARE NOT / WILL NOT / CAN NOT be actual human beings! They CAN be programed to find solutions to complex problems based on the data they are able to consult. They may even do this quickly. But there is NO guarantee that their result is (or can be) based on provably unprejudiced, unbiased information, nor that they can, actually, make actual value judgements. My belief is that what this means is that they will NEVER be able to replace the need for decision-making based on personal/social values, beliefs or judgements, as human beings can. I would prefer that NO “machines” be entrusted with (for example) the ability to launch nuclear weapons. Humans CAN go nuts (See the movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb), but at least human beings can understand that such decisions should be based on the absolutely best information available, be thoroughly thought-out, and that safeguards can (and should) be installed throughout the process, as they actually were in real Minuteman missile sites, for example (or, see the movie: War Games).
However, at this moment of time I strongly support the feelings expressed by Harry Bliss in the drawing below:
Nor are they ever likely to be able to make “judgements” based on values, preferences, emotions, etc. After all, they ARE NOT / WILL NOT / CAN NOT be actual human beings! They CAN be programed to find solutions to complex problems based on the data they are able to consult. They may even do this quickly. But there is NO guarantee that their result is (or can be) based on provably unprejudiced, unbiased information, nor that they can, actually, make actual value judgements. My belief is that what this means is that they will NEVER be able to replace the need for decision-making based on personal/social values, beliefs or judgements, as human beings can. I would prefer that NO “machines” be entrusted with (for example) the ability to launch nuclear weapons. Humans CAN go nuts (See the movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb), but at least human beings can understand that such decisions should be based on the absolutely best information available, be thoroughly thought-out, and that safeguards can (and should) be installed throughout the process, as they actually were in real Minuteman missile sites, for example (or, see the movie: War Games).
However, at this moment of time I strongly support the feelings expressed by Harry Bliss in the drawing below:
I may well do another post (possibly more than one) related to the topic of AI at some point(s) in the future. It DOES seem to be a topic of considerable controversy and discussion these days. But, I won’t do it right away. However, I do plan to be back in a couple of weeks to talk about something.
Perhaps you’ll join me to see what I come up with then, or, you might want to comment on this post by clicking on the blue “Comments” word at the end of it. I can’t believe that some others do not have thoughts about these matters.
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
Perhaps you’ll join me to see what I come up with then, or, you might want to comment on this post by clicking on the blue “Comments” word at the end of it. I can’t believe that some others do not have thoughts about these matters.
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
RSS Feed