Skip to main content

Why do we struggle with AI?

Yes, AI, as in Artificial Intelligence. Is it or can it be as bad as we think? Or are our negative thoughts toward it simply biased from science fiction?

I mean, the ability for a computer to accept 1's and 0's in the form of programming code and turn that into a self-learning, better yet, a self-thinking machine is fantastic to me. But are we wrong in assuming it's potential? Great minds like Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk have publically said that we need to be particularly careful with AI. But have we even achieved true AI yet?

To answer that, let's look at what we have right now, at least as public information. I'll focus on the biggies, the first being Google's DeepMind. They were in the news recently because of a software they call AlphaGo, which was tasked with playing the world's greatest Go player in a series to see if machine can beat man. And crazily enough, it did! It did lose as well, to be fair. If you don't know what Go is, it's an ancient chinese game somewhat similar to chess in its strategic thinking. The software uses machine learning which is something much too advanced for me to talk about here, mostly because it's witchcraft to me. But essentially, it uses complex algorithms to analyze and make decisions based on data it's observed. Really cool stuff.

But, this "AI" was meant specifically to learn and play the game Go, so I wouldn't be too worried about it taking over the internet and turning those flying quadcopters against us (garbage skynet reference... I apologize).

Another "AI"-type project fairly popular is IBM's Watson. Watson, cleverly named I might add, is a software system that "understands" natural language and uses algorithms to answer rather complex questions. It had access to all of Wikipedia (offline), and competed on Jeopardy and actually won! But that's not AI. Watson can analyze "unstructured" data, and "learn" subjects and answer questions about them, but it cannot "think". Again, not AI, but some impressive technology.

So is AI just a sci-fi pipe-dream? Can we make a truly intelligent machine? Will it take over the world when it realizes that humans aren't perfect beings?

Those are some tough questions, and I think as humans who have never had to contemplate these situations before, it's not an easy thing to think about. If true AI is achieved, should it be allowed access to the internet? Should we even be trying to create AI? Are intelligent machines the worst weapon of all? Mind you, we did create the nuclear bomb, but those were different times.

I think if you put aside all the sci-fi-esque scenarios and look at the positive potential of AI, then yeah, it could change a lot. It would see solutions to problems humans could never see. It could end hunger, or minimize the consequences of climate change. It would likely reduce or eliminate jobs basically everywhere.. so we may need to keep an eye out for that.. but will it launch a nuclear war to end humanity? Well, I think we may watch too many movies.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

New blog!

Hello fellow humans! I have decided to keep my brain segregated into my two trains of thought for these blog posts. Let's face it, you're going to read both because I'm an excellent writer (note the exuding of confidence through the computer) but for those who don't care about what I have to say on day to day topics, and only enjoy my magnificent opinions on science-related topics, this page is for you! I even have a cool new URL.. I think. I'm no pro at this (ask the $0.05 I've earned from these posts). I realize one of you probably accidentally clicked on the ad and BAM, I earned half a penny (which only exists in the meta-world now a days, at least in Canada). So thanks for helping feed a starving student kind patron! Unfortunately, it's way too much work to transfer the science posts from "NOT A JOURNAL", my other fantastic blog, to this one, so, guess I'm starting fresh. If you'd like any explanations of specific topics in science-re...

You're Always Halfway There

The word half is weird. Think about it, if I have a long rope, say 10 feet long, and want to cut it in half as many times as I can, what would be the length of that rope when I'm finished? Sounds like one of those math problems you got in school that seemed easy and then ended up being a "What the #%!& is going on?" question. Because it is . If I cut the 10 foot rope in half, I'll have two 5 foot ropes. If I cut one of them in half, well, I'll have two 2.5 foot ropes. If I cut one of those in half 10 more times, I'll have two 0.0024 foot ropes. That's about 0.03 inches or about 0.7 mm. That's about half the thickness of a dime. Pretty thin, but if you see where I'm going, theoretically you can cut that in half again and do so for infinity. In real life, well.. I would have stopped cutting that rope a while ago since it's quite difficult to cut a half inch rope, never mind one that's less than 0.1 inches. Regardless of the fact th...

Reality of Relativity

I came across an interesting question which brought me back to highschool physics. Want to hear it? Probably why you're here... If I'm travelling forward in a car at the speed of a bullet, and my partner in crime shoots an actual bullet out of the back of the car (ignoring the windshield), what happens to the bullet? Hm, seems simple right? It is if you have a basic understanding of vectors! Remember vectors? Imagine an arrow, pointing in the direction of the car, and another pointing in the direction the bullet was fired. So you should be picturing two arrows pointing in the opposite direction of each other. Now vectors aren't just arrows, they represent both direction AND magnitude. Magnitude in this case being the speed of the bullet, which was also the speed of the car. So these arrows (vectors) are equal in length (representing the magnitude) and opposite in direction. Pretty easy to follow, right? Now, here is where I want you to think of the scenario mentio...