Smarter than who?



As was mentioned in a previous blog, America as a whole has failed the turing test. The CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai, is now warning us that their AI may be stupider than previously mentioned – or at least riskier to the business.

New products and services, including those that incorporate or utilize artificial intelligence and machine learning, can raise new or exacerbate existing ethical, technological, legal, and other challenges, which may negatively affect our brands and demand for our products and services and adversely affect our revenues and operating results.

Microsoft in its previous filings did a similar red flag warning in August:

AI algorithms may be flawed. Datasets may be insufficient or contain biased information. Inappropriate or controversial data practices by Microsoft or others could impair the acceptance of AI solutions. These deficiencies could undermine the decisions, predictions, or analysis AI applications produce, subjecting us to competitive harm, legal liability, and brand or reputational harm.

Why are two of the major purveyors of commercial AI waving their hands in the air like a couple of teenage girls that got caught smoking in the bathroom.


 Because they KNOW that:

  1. The AI they sell is potentially very dangerous – in two distinct ways. The first is that someone with evil intent uses it to do bad things. The second is if someone with good intentions but with incompetent execution uses it for bad things. The second scenario is probably much more likely.
  2. The marketing engines of IBM, Google, Microsoft and Amazon (and others) have so overhyped the potential for AI that there is an inevitable crash coming. There was already a long AI winter from the 80’s until about 8 years ago. I am predicting another one – and clearly they are too.

What would these companies need to feel comfortable that their AI was not going come back and hurt them? Meaning hurt their bottom line? The obvious answer is that it would need to be smarter. Right now AI is a tool. Not a thing. Its a set of features. Because its not smart – scenario (1) and (2) above are not only perfectly reasonable outcomes – but will in fact inevitably will happen.

So what to do with dumb AI? Maybe rename it? Would Microsoft and Google be putting warnings in their annual reports about the dangers of “a dumb set of tools that allow people to build things that seem to learn over large datasets, but really its kind of an illusion.” Hardly.  But it does not seem likely that we can do that. The collective marketing departments of these companies are WAY too invested in selling the current set of tools as “Artificial Intelligence”.

The other option is to create a new standard of intelligence.

Something better than the turing test.

We have mentioned in a previous blog that “Being alive” and “Staying alive” are the clearest essence of Existential philosophy. And we know that Existential philosophies are the best because they are French. The French just know more than the rest of us. They are both the most liberal and most politically incorrect group on the planet. Think about that a moment.

And who is the paragon of French Existentialist thoughts? Sartre of course!

So let us note that in this Blog we are the first to submit to critical review the idea that software pretending to be smart are ONLY TO BE LABELED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IF AND ONLY IF THEY ARE SMARTER THAN SARTRE.

Camus might be ok too.

Humans-Above-Technology-Logo-B1The organization behind TrustNoRobot is now a non-profit! Our mission is to promote humans above technology.   Our simple belief is that technology should work for humans and better their condition and never have a negative impact on humanity. Please find it in your heart to donate to this important cause.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.