Posts Tagged ‘Public lecture’

Artificial Intelligence and its Dangers.

December 27, 2023

An apology

I’ve been really remiss: I haven’t updated this blog for more than two years. But perhaps today (Storm Gerrit outside, with wind and heavy rain) is a good day to get back to it.

Artificial Intelligence

I recently gave a talk on Artificial Intelligence (AI) to a group of retired academics (Stirling University Retired Staff Association, SURSA). As an academic, I worked on related matters for many years, and remain involved in AI. This was a non-technical talk, to academics from many disciplines. It went down well, and led to lots of discussion.

It also led to me talking to quite a variety of people about AI after the talk, as I felt more able to take a broader perspective on AI than I had as a researcher, where I necessarily concentrated on some tightly defined areas. This led me to thinking more about both the possible dangers of AI research in the near future.

What are the dangers of AI?

A great deal has been written about the existential dangers of AI: I’m less than convinced. Firstly, because AI, at least as matters stand, is only intelligent in certain senses. It lacks volition (or will) entirely, which to me means that it’s not about to take over or enslave the human population of the Earth. (I note that intelligence with volition, as is to be found in humans, has indeed taken over and enslaved parts of the animal and plant kingdoms).

Secondly, current AI systems are generally deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) mixed with systems for generating text, and sometimes logical inference engines. These are made up of a number of components which, while not new, can take advantage of major advances in computing technology, as well as the vast amount of digitised data available on the internet. Often they are used as a user-friendly gateway on to the WWW, enabling quite complex questions to be asked and answered, instead of searching the internet using a set of keywords. This is an intelligent user interface, but not intelligent in human terms.

Of course, such systems can replace humans in many tasks which currently are undertaken by well-educated people (including the chattering classes who write newspaper articles and web blogs!). Tasks like summarising data, researching past legal cases, or writing summaries of research in specific areas might become automatable. This continues a process started with the spinning jenny, and running through the industrial revolution where human strength and some artisanal skills ceased to be a qualification for work. While this is certainly a problem, it is not an existential one. The major issue here is who has the power: who (and how many) will benefit from these changes, which makes this a political issue.

I am more concerned about volition.

As matters stand this is not an area that is well understood. Can intelligence, volition and awareness be separated? Can volition be inserted into the types of AI system that we can currently build?

I don’t think this is possible with our current level of understanding, but there is a great deal of research ongoing into neuroscience and neurophysiology, and it is certainly not beyond imagination that this will lead to a much more scientificically grounded theory of mind. And volition could well be understood sufficiently to be implemented in AI systems.

Another possibility is that we will discover that volition and awareness are restricted to living systems: but are we trying to build synthetic living systems? Possibly, but this is an area that has huge ethical issues. Electronic systems (including computers) are definitely not alive in any sense, but the idea of interfacing electronics to cultured neural systems is one that has been around for quite some time (though the technical difficulties are considerable).

In conclusion: should we be worried – or how worried should we be?

There are many things that we can be worried about, ranging from nuclear war, to everyday land wars, to ecological catastrophies, to pandemics. Where might AI and its dangers fit within these dangers? From an employment point of view, AI has the capacity to remove certain types of job, but equally to create novel forms of job, dealing with data in a different way. I am not a great believer in the capability of governments large or small being able to influence technology. Generally, governments are well behind in technological sophistication, and have rings run round them by technology companies.  

We do need to think hard about giving systems volition. Yet equally we do want to build autonomous systems for particular applications (think of undersea or space exploration), which would provide some reasons for research into awareness of the systems environment. This could require research into providing certain types of autonomous drive, particularly where the delay between anyone who might control the system and the system itself is large. But rolling out such systems with volition, without careful safeguards could indeed be dangerous. But what form might these safeguards take, given that governments are generally behind the times, and that these systems are produced by large independent technology companies primarily motivated by profit? This is a difficult question, and one to which I do not have an answer.

Of public lectures

April 16, 2016

Last Thursday, I gave a public lecture entitled The incredible shrinking computer: computer hardware from relays to 14 nanometre transistors, part of a series of public lectures in my Department. This series has been running for a few years now, and this was the third time I’d contributed. In 2014, I did one on sound, Hear here: from the ear to the brain, and in 2013 one on artificial intelligence, Artificial Intelligence: is it finally arriving?

These lectures attract an audience of between about 40 and 60, depending on whether it’s nice night, what else is going on, and so on. And it’s actually a lot of work creating these lectures (for example, for the one I just did, I managed to borrow old computer components, and that’s quite apart from the research of putting together something rather better than my average student lecture, with more and better images, for example). So now I (and I suspect, my co-presenters) are interested in where else we might present these talks. Yes, we understand that each talk will need more work, to make it just right for the particular audience, but even then, we’re interested in other possibilities for presenting these again.

I should add that the talks are well received by their audiences, and that the audiences we have had range in age from about 12 upwards – a long way upwards! Is anyone listening out there in www-land? Any suggestions?

(I have two ideas in mind: one is science festivals, and the other is secondary (i.e. high) schools: I just need to get out there and organise them.)

A Public Lecture

May 15, 2014

This evening, I gave a public lecture at my University, entitled “Hear here: from the ear to the brain”. And last year, in the same series,  I gave a talk about Artificial Intelligence. Both went well: but I’d really like to give these talks elsewhere as well. And I don’t know quite how to organise this – I’m not really quite up to pushing myself on to a science festival (and often they go for professional science publicists, rather than plain old professors!). Is there another career for waiting for me there?

Today’s talk was interesting from my viewpoint too. the audience age ranged from about 11 to about 75! Some were retired academics, some were locals, and some were the children of academics. I think I managed to target it well, but it’s a tricky business: not losing (or boring) the younger, less experienced part of the audience, yet attempting to keep the interest of the older ones. But judging from the questions at the end I managed OK. Interestingly, it felt more like a performance than a lecture: more like I had played a gig on the piano, than stood up and spoken for a while: not really like a standard lecture at all.

And yet: what I’d really like to do would be to mix together the various skills I have and give an illustrated public lecture illustrated with music, played on the piano. Perhaps that would be a bit hard though I did manage to give a musically accompanied speech at my late father’s 80’th birthday, more than 20 years ago. What sorts of music might illustrate artificial intelligence? The musical accompaniment to the sound and hearing talk might be easier, however.

And now? Quietly sitting, writing, having quaffed a few beers, just to relax. Back to the everyday grind tomorrow!

Artificial Intelligence: are we nearly there yet?

May 2, 2013

Last night I gave a public lecture, at my University, with the title above. It went well: there were about 50 people, between about 11 and 75 in age, with some academics, some teachers, and quite a few whom I simply didn’t know. I spoke to my slides for about 45 minutes, then opened the floor to questions: and there really were a lot. I’m happy with the talk, I had been worried about it, for it’s a very different thing to be talking to a audience that’s come out in the evening, from lecturing to students. But this went well. Pitching it was an issue: how can one present material about artificial intelligence which fits all these people. I tried, and I think I succeeded. I had a very interesting discussion with a 17 year old lad at the end: I’d been saying that the concept of the AI Singularity was predicated in the concept of abstract intelligence – which is something I really don’t believe in. But he pointed out that there was nothing in  my argument to stop an embodied intelligence from building a more intelligent embodied intelligence, and that this could still be at the root of a positive-feedback intelligence loop. I couldn’t fault his logic. So now I’m not sure whether to worry about the singularity or not! Actually, Jurgen Schmidhuber thinks I should stop worrying and look at what’s already been done!

It took me a little while to work out why I was so pleased to have given the talk: then I remembered going to some public lectures in Glasgow University in the mid-1960’s, as a teenager, and really enjoying them. It is good to give something back!

Note: I’ve now written a 1000 word extract on AI, possibly for a newspaper – though it doesn’t mention the singularity. And now the Deccan Herald has published it!