{"id":4098,"date":"2018-02-01T00:01:30","date_gmt":"2018-02-01T00:01:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/chief-exec.com\/?p=4098"},"modified":"2018-03-12T09:31:29","modified_gmt":"2018-03-12T09:31:29","slug":"ai-provokes-revolutionary-minds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/?p=4098","title":{"rendered":"AI provokes revolutionary minds"},"content":{"rendered":"

Artificial intelligence is no longer the sole preserve of data scientists and science fiction writers, with its technological applications now pervading daily life, says James Fitzgerald<\/em>. \u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The \u201cFourth Industrial Revolution\u201d was a term that tripped off the tongues of movers and shakers at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos.<\/p>\n

Harry Elmer Barnes, the historical sociologist, coined the phrase in 1948, to describe the imminent adoption of atomic energy and supersonic transport by society as he saw it.<\/p>\n

The media\u2019s coverage of AI has more recently focused on fears around loss of control, and the ethics associated with its impact on the employment market. But the positive implications for health care<\/a> have also come to the fore in the public mind.<\/p>\n

A recent sitting of the government\u2019s Artificial Intelligence Committee<\/a> in the House of Lords heard from experts in an attempt to better formulate a government-wide approach to managing the technology\u2019s myriad effects on society.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have this very particular sense of AI as a world transforming innovation which I think is an unhelpful way of thinking about any technological advance,\u201d David Edgerton, Hans Rausing Professor of the History of Science and Technology at King\u2019s College London told the committee.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think there\u2019s a problem of elite understanding here. The notion of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is a perfect illustration of that: why do people who are supposed experts in this field talk in this extremely crude, ahistorical, unanalytical, evidence-free way? Not so much about AI, but a whole host of other novelties. So, it\u2019s far too easy to blame the media for this way of thinking.\u201d<\/p>\n

In 1963 British prime minister Harold Wilson gave a speech that would sound familiar today. \u201cWhen machine tools have acquired, as they now have, the faculty of unassisted reproduction you have reached a point of no return where, if man is not going to assert his control over machines, then machines are going to assert their control over man.\u201d<\/p>\n

So, it seems we have been here before \u2014 but what evidence exists to the contrary?<\/p>\n

\u201cThis rhetoric is just reheated nonsense from a hundred years ago,\u201d says Prof Edgerton.<\/p>\n

Peter McOwan, a vice-principal at Queen Mary University of London is not overawed by the technology.<\/p>\n

\u201cAll that artificial intelligence does in the terms defined today is find patterns in data. And we are constantly finding patterns in data ourselves when we are reading something, for example \u2014 we are segmenting the letters from the page \u2014 and that is all that artificial intelligence does,\u201d says Prof McOwan.<\/p>\n

This raises questions of science fiction versus science fact.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is an area that has been full of puff for decade after decade.\u00a0Now there is some fantastic work going on in machine learning, in algorithms, self-driving cars \u2013 all this technology is quite extraordinary. Whether any of it can really be considered as intelligent [is] another matter \u2026 I think that AI should be reserved for generalised artificial intelligence; stuff that really does show intelligence,\u201d says Sir David Spiegelhalter, president of the Royal Statistical Society.<\/p>\n

\u201cMedia representations are incredibly important for any scientific technology, and I think the people working in this area need to take more responsibility for the representation of their subject. If there are puff stories, they need to be called out \u2026 so that the stories told are gripping but accurate.\u201d<\/p>\n

Academics could learn from Brian Cox and David Attenborough, who have successfully pushed scientific narratives on reductionist astrophysics and Darwinism, respectively, with their engaging and conversational styles.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen people did surveys of the type of technologies they were scared of in the 1970s, microwave ovens were up there with nuclear power stations, but people got to like microwave ovens \u2026 because they are very useful. Mobile phones: is it giving you brain cancer? Well, it\u2019s not a big issue because people like using their mobile phones and they don\u2019t want to get rid of them.\u201d<\/p>\n

The \u201caffect heuristic\u201d \u2013 a quick way to make decisions based on emotional \u201cgut\u201d feeling \u2013 comes into play when people warm to a technology.\u00a0Once you decide something is good, you are likely to discount criticisms of it out of hand. The opposite happens, says Prof Spiegelhalter, with developments such as fracking, where no discernible benefit is perceived \u2013 except to a corporation.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think the crucial thing is whether people feel the technology is being useful to them. And it\u2019s already being massively useful \u2026 every time they use Google maps or take a picture, where the phone is identifying the eyes, focusing. People are already using this technology [AI] all the time,\u201d says Prof Spiegelhalter. \u201cMy feeling is that this is not the type of technology that will have the same intrinsic fear associated with it as some of the others where people don\u2019t feel they are getting any benefit.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, in a world where the consensus reality is formed through the machinery of vested or commercial interests \u2014 utilising marketing, branding and lobbyists \u2014 questions of choice encompass broader philosophical parameters.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think it\u2019s rather concerning that we talk about technology in terms of the final consumer,\u201d says Prof Edgerton. \u201cTechnical choices are being made by all kinds of agents who are not the final consumer, so this positing of a certain type of consumer who is inherently distrustful doesn\u2019t capture the problem at all. Lots of different bodies are taking decisions, some openly; some cause controversy, most don\u2019t. If the question is, does the market system and particular research agendas of governments produce the optimum technical development, then I think the answer is almost certainly no, it doesn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

Rather than assume that novel techniques just come out of the ether, Prof Edgerton says we must shift the discussion to ask, what kinds of things would we like as a society and how do we ensure they come about?<\/p>\n

\n

‘Ethics and innovation are two sides of the one coin, where one is about the production and the other is about the control or the criticism. You need both.’<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Whether society\u2019s relationship with AI will be guided by commercial imperatives, governmental agendas or hidden vested interests remains to be seen. But the optimal path may start with the questions we ask about ourselves and how this technology might serve us.<\/p>\n

It is arguable whether the type of AI currently in the public sphere is truly artificial or intelligent. The everyday devices relying on its algorithms could also be described simply as \u201csmart tech\u201d. In a recent Eurobarometer survey, 74 per cent of respondents in the UK said they would make more use of digital technologies if there was more widespread trust of the providers.<\/p>\n

When it comes to AI or algorithms \u201cthe idea of interpretability and explanation is incredibly important,\u201d says Prof Spiegelhalter. \u201cHow can you make Deep Mind interpretable? People are desperately trying to work out ways to produce explanations for why things are happening [in black box algorithms].\u201d<\/p>\n

There is a debate in the industry as to whether it might be better to reduce predictive accuracy in order to have something simpler that can be explained to people \u2013 and therefore make it more trustworthy.<\/p>\n

The news last week that Chinese artificial intelligence is capable of outperforming humans in reading comprehension can only add to public anxieties.<\/p>\n

A neural network model created by e-commerce group Alibaba outperformed participants on a 100,000-question Stanford University test. The system, developed by Alibaba\u2019s Institute of Data Science of Technologies, scored 82.44, while humans scored 82.304. Microsoft\u2019s artificial intelligence model recently achieved 82.65 on the exam.<\/p>\n

However, it may still be possible for humans to manipulate their online car insurance renewals (run by simple black box algorithms) by reverse-engineering the answers they give, on address, mileage, driving behaviour, etc \u2014 in other words, by lying.<\/p>\n

A website that briefly appeared in 2010 \u2014 PleaseRobMe.com<\/a> \u2014 provided a sharp shock on what simple AI could achieve with snippets of people\u2019s personal data. The website, which only lasted for 48 hours, aggregated information about individuals from the \u201cgeo tags\u201d on pictures and posts online and combined that with \u201ctime stamps\u201d, so that the system could identify addresses or locations and thereby ascertain whether individuals were at home, allowing those people to be targeted for a household robbery.<\/p>\n

Facial recognition methods are evolving rapidly and have expanded out of the security sphere to consumer applications, including Facebook\u2019s adoption of the method. Identity politics is becoming a hot topic in cyberspace.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt seems to me that it will be impossible to tell everybody in every situation when they are providing data,\u201d says Prof Spiegelhalter. Which brings in questions over data governance. \u201cRather than each person having to be responsible for everything that\u2019s being extracted from them, it seems to be a scenario where regulation and governance are appropriate. At the same time, data literacy, especially among children, is enormously important,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is nothing free on the web. You give your data and that is your payment,\u201d says Prof McOwan.<\/p>\n

\n

‘All that artificial intelligence does in the terms defined today is find patterns in data. And we are constantly finding patterns in data ourselves …’<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Prof Edgerton suggests that the blanket acceptance of driverless transport or full automation of manufacturing does humanity a disservice and may skew the public\u2019s understanding of what the future may be like. \u201cIt is to misunderstand the nature of our society to assume that one particular technique will have a transformative effect that is out of proportion to all the other methods in play.\u201d<\/p>\n

There may be many benefits from hands-free driving but why should they eclipse the beneficial social and health effects from walking or cycling?<\/p>\n

David Puttnam, the former film producer, expressed concerns about the \u201cproductisation\u201d of people. \u201cI spent the first dozen years of my life in advertising, and by the time I left I had no illusions that if you offer advantages to advertisers to find more information about their customers, they will take them.\u201d\u00a0Lord Puttnam says he is troubled by the possibilities of data misuse.<\/p>\n

The UK already has a variety of bodies that provide a regulatory framework. The Information Commissioner\u2019s Office upholds information rights in the public interest, and the Nuffield Convention on Data Ethics has just been signed. A council for data science ethics has also been proposed. But clearly regulatory oversight will need to keep up with a rapidly evolving technology.<\/p>\n

Lord Puttnam says the government reacted with \u201clightning speed\u201d following the release of Vance Packard\u2019s 1957 book The Hidden Persuaders<\/em>, which revealed methods of subliminal advertising. \u201cThe IBA [Independent Broadcasting Authority] moved within a year to set out clearly what you could and couldn\u2019t do on television with the speed of images.\u201d<\/p>\n

The parameters of data protection agencies are less defined in a globally connected world, where data havens exist outside of national regulations and protections. Indeed, the question of whether an individual supports or benefits from the use of their data will also further complicate the issue.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to get back into a position \u2013 \u00a0I think we were there, at least partially, in the years after 1945 \u2013 where we can take a collective view as how to improve society and act on it collectively,\u201d says Prof Edgerton. \u201cI think we should empower ourselves as a collectivity to think through the kind of society that we want and kind of machines that we want; the type of techniques we want to deploy and, indeed, who should have control over this.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cEthics and innovation are two sides of the one coin, where one is about the production and the other is about the control or the criticism. You need both,\u201d says Prof Spiegelhalter.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Image Credits:
\nWillyam Bradberry\/Shutterstock.com
\nStephen Finn\/Shutterstock.com<\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Artificial intelligence is no longer the sole preserve of data scientists and science fiction writers, with its technological applications now pervading daily life, says James Fitzgerald. \u00a0   The \u201cFourth Industrial Revolution\u201d…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":4101,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[61],"tags":[113,85,102,120,43],"class_list":["post-4098","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-innovation","tag-ai","tag-behaviour","tag-china","tag-ict","tag-regulations"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4098","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4098"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4098\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4113,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4098\/revisions\/4113"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/4101"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4098"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4098"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4098"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}