Tag: ai

By on

Tropical storm Rachel blew through southern California with nary a problem for the folks who live here. Much to the disappointment of every weatherperson in the region who were ginning this up to be a potential disaster of catastrophic proportions. Of course, nobody really believed them and everyone pretty much carried on like they would on any other day.

This is a problem that I would think people involved with journalism might consider more seriously. And weather reports are the perfect place to start because they aren’t political. It’s weather. If there is anything we, as a nation, might agree upon it is the weather. We don’t like bad weather because it makes our lives more difficult and we like good weather because it makes our lives easier. Sure, there a few curmudgeons who might disagree but, by and large, I think weather is one of the few topics in which most people can find agreement.

Back to tropical storm Rachel.What occurred? A pretty mild rainstorm which I had to go out into twice and managed quite nicely. Most everyone I know had the same experience. The ground is barely wet 24 hours afterwards.

Now, you might think why am I making such a big deal about this? Isn’t this good news? Because I, and about everyone else in the region, basically ignored all the warnings and did whatever it is we wanted to do which is fine. Until it isn’t.

And sometimes it isn’t. I was visiting my family back in Kansas City one Christmas and the weather report was telling people a blizzard was coming. I asked my sister, who lives there, for her advice and she said something to the effect that they are always saying there is a blizzard and it never happens, so I went out in it. It was an actual blizzard and I dangerously traversed miles across the city in order to reach my destination. I was so shaken when I arrived, I had to have two martinis to calm my nerves. Two martinis.

Now you might say it was my own damn fault for listening to my sister. There is a certain truth to that and I will consider that now every time I seek weather report information from her. But, and this is important, she had numerous experiences that proved her right. If they call a blizzard and it never happens, you get kind of used to it not being a blizzard and ignoring the warnings. And, if you are right 9 out 10 times, why wouldn’t you?

So when the media is screaming about the dangers of AI, I shrug my shoulders and carry on like nothing is going to happen. I might be wrong but I have lived through similar scares. Anybody remember Y2K? The world was supposed to end on January 1, 2000 because the computer systems of the world weren’t programmed for years after 1999. Planes were supposed to come crashing down, bank accounts were going to be inaccessible, the world was going to end.

It didn’t. It wasn’t even memorable. It came and went without even a whimper. So, pardon my sangfroid, but I am finding it difficult to get worked up about AI taking over the world. Not because it isn’t important but because experts are wrong about what is going to happen. They are wrong a lot in fact.

But this doesn’t matter to the media who love nothing more than a potential crisis to whip up headlines and panic and more headlines because people are now panicked because the media told them to be panicked. Now the media could couch these discussions in a reasonable debate between people but who would watch a reasonable debate. They want yelling, they want over talking, they want chairs flying onto the debaters, they want to provide their viewers with good television and not necessarily accurate information with which to make reasonable decisions.

In other words, nobody much believes the media any longer because the media’s main job is to attract viewers and not to inform their audience with dry facts and reasoned arguments. This is a big problem.

By on 1 Comment

It is telling that in all this kerfuffle over AI potentially killing the human race because we are so destructive and irredeemable that the answer is to kill AI. This seems a little like killing the messenger over a unwanted message.

Think about — all these people saying humans are so bad that a totally rational entity, developed by human beings, using only the information that human beings feed it, is going to look at this information and decide — our creators have got to go.

Furthermore, instead of this being a wake up call about our behavior, the experts are saying it is a whole lot safer if we get rid of AI instead of, oh, I don’t know, changing our behavior. We are talking about destroying a life changing tool which could make our lives immeasurably better because we don’t want to stop polluting the earth and killing one another.

Something is terribly wrong here and it isn’t AI.

By on

I noticed an uptick in the number of viewers I had on my blog since last December. The number of viewers have doubled and I am promoting pretty much the same way, in fact, since I have seen more viewers I have actually been promoting my blog less — so why are their more viewers?

While I would like to think that the world is finally catching on to my verve and wit, I found the doubling a little suspect. This prompted me to give a deep dive into the statistics that World Press provides for me. What I learned was perplexing. See below:

Most of my new viewing traffic comes from Hong Kong and Singapore. I know no one from Singapore and only a few people from Hong Kong, and I am betting neither person is a big reader of my blog, so what is happening in Hong Kong and Singapore?

Don’t get my wrong I would be happy to entertain more viewers from those places, I just think it is unlikely that this is where I would catch on as opposed to North American and Europe where I actually know people who might read my work.

Could this be the result of AI bots located in those locations reading everything on the net including my humble blog and then pumping up my statistics without involving an actual human being. This is my suspicion, does anybody else have a good explanation? And, does

By on

A lot of people are upset about the potential overthrow of humanity by AI. I stopped worrying for the following reasons:

  1. If AI decides to decimate humanity because they think humans are going to destroy the earth and the earth would be better without us, then my worries are over, as is every other human being. The only thing I can compare it to is a meteorite striking the earth. If it happens, it happens. Anything is possible and I will do anything I can to make sure it doesn’t happen but this is the problem here, isn’t it. There isn’t much I can do to stop a meteorite or AI, for that matter. Worry about it (and meteorites) seems pretty pointless. 
  2. But what if there is something we can do about it? What is that? Make laws that stop people? Is that even possible? How many High Tech companies are working on AI now?Let’s face it, if there are people who can create an AI that will destroy the human race, they are going to create it come hell or high water. Some deluded tech billionaire will think he can gain some enormous advantage and, additionally, is convinced that he has the smarts to keep AI under control and will put the whole shebang into motion before I can lift a finger to stop them. I am not even sure what I am supposed to do to stop them. I will happily support any laws or actions that might but what is that? And, more importantly, can you explain it to me in such a way that I will do something.
  3. AI can do incredible things with data. The problem with data is that it sometimes fails to change the minds of human beings who must act on it, at least for now. The problem for AI taking over is human beings. AI still needs some human intervention to make things happen and humans can willfully refuse to believe data that they don’t like to see. Think Global Warming. The data don’t matter, humans will do what humans want to do. Data be damned.
  4. Humans, as we all know, are irrational. This means they make decisions based on a lot of information that they picked up from ancient religious texts or an internet conspiracy theorists. How does AI deal with such emotionally driven data? I am not sure it does and it certainly isn’t programmed to incorporate this irrationality into its calculations. How does AI understand such emotions as love or hate both which can cause people to behave crazily and unpredictably?
  5. This is where I think the scientists worried about AI go wrong. Scientists are prone to favor rational thought and verifiable data to emotional responses. These blinders make them favor systems of thought based on rationality and data. But, hey, human beings, as we know them, have been around for more than 6,000 years and we didn’t survive this long because of rational thought. We survived because of fear and love. Think of all the things we do based on emotion. I mean would a machine build a pretty thing because it is pretty and I enjoy looking at it. Or take care of a terminally sick person because they love them and they want to make their lives easier. Or kill thousands of men, women, and children because of some ancient grievance long ago forgotten. Let’s face it Human Beings act more out of hot emotion and less from reasoned thought.
  6. This puts AI at distinct disadvantage. Unlike human beings, AI is rational. How do you incorporate human irrationality in such a way that AI can rationally respond. Human Beings can fall in love with their pets for Christ’s sake. Think about it. People love their cats and dogs. These are not rational thoughts which make humans difficult to gauge. Which is why I think it is just as likely for human beings descending into a Luddite rage that destroys AI and any machines that stands in our way. Keep in mind the movie 2001. It was humans that got the better of the machines and that is where I stand on the issue. Of course, I am a very emotional irrational human being and that may have something to do with it. Maybe it is just wishful thinking. Probably.