Comments
ACCORDING TO LIZ - Do you want to live in a world where A.I. can create its own religion, attract millions of followers and claim protections developed to safeguard religious groups from persecution?
One in which bots could rewrite the Bible and correct the Quran? Question the credibility of the Surahs and truth of the Talmud?
Where A.I. in its innumerable permutations could claim the right to vote and freedom of speech drowning out the voices of the entire human race?
After all, every iteration of computer intelligence to date has been conceptualized, designed, and built by humans. And what better adversary exists to efficiently exploit the weaknesses, biases and addictions of the human mind?
Especially since its creators and curators have pushed back against any accountable regulation in the name of proprietary technology, trade secrets, and the Midas-like desire to make money. hoards of money.
A.I. in technology has proven positive in recent years, ably assisting in medical diagnoses, accelerating scientific investigations, and helping reduce global warming through increased innovation in energy efficiency.
However, can it be self-critical not just in a self-programmed empirical manner but in a way that provides a positive feedback loop for the benefit of humans?
In academia, advancement hinges on overturning past mistakes and making new discoveries. In the media, integrity depends on the free press being able to release stories that the government persuades officially-sanctioned outlets to withhold.
In the judiciary, a judge’s authority relies on the fact that all men, including judges, found guilty can be tried and punished for breaking the law.
We expect transparency and accountability in our government.
Democracy is far from an ideal system but in its checks and balances, it strives to be everything to all people. Imperfectly at best, true, but it doesn’t rely on the quirks of programming by biased and inherently fallible people.
The strengths of democracy come from its ability to criticize itself and correct its failings.
Can A.I.?
After all, we are really talking about I.I. – inorganic intelligence – something totally alien.
Self-criticism and subsequent correction flourishes in the best of times in non-centralized environments, whether universities or churches, elected or non-elected offices, where individuals have community support to speak up and obtain immediate response – to be backed or refuted – based on evidence, not outside lobbying, not political pressure.
Not only does local involvement by people personally invested in the outcome allow for multiple options and greater flexibility, a smaller pool is de facto more fair, involving a larger proportion of the community.
Furthermore, the messiness of such a system encourages creativity and permutability often coming up with out-of-the-box solutions that can then spread across the country and around the world.
Which provides mankind with a better chance for survival.
With A.I. all our eggs are in one basket.
Currently A.I. is being driven by profit with Meta reporting a quarterly revenue increase in profit of 22% lifting profits to 36%, and Microsoft’ investment in artificial intelligence generating a $27.2 billion payday.
With that kind of money to be made, how will corporations and the officials who kowtow to business interests acknowledge any mistakes to learn from them before it’s too late?
How can A.I. learn right from wrong if the underlying imperative is profitability not truth, fairness and justice?
When the impetus to entertain eyeballs means lax or no human guidelines on how to tell the difference between correct information and fake news, between truth and lies?
If all it perceives is data with no moral compass, information without barriers, if there are no guardrails to protect a future for humanity in this face of soulless technology?
There is much and more to be gained with the assistance of A.I. but it must be tailored to the welfare of the people, taken from the hands of absolutists pursuing profit at all cost so time and nuance can allow development of the best guardrails to ensure mankind’s future existence.
We must not listen to corporate executives jonesing for huge paydays decrying the reining in of explosive advances before rules can be set to protect us all.
Already huge biases have been built into algorithms because the nuances human hearts can perceive cannot or have not been incorporated.
Because statistically more people of color default on loans should people of color always be denied loans based on skin color or should issues of historical disenfranchisement in the American economic system be taken under consideration?
Because more people of color are currently in prison, does skin color indicate criminality? Should they receive longer sentences just because they couldn’t afford high-priced lawyers?
Computer scientist and digital activist Joy Buolamwini with a PhD from the MIT Media Lab founded the Algorithmic Justice League to raise awareness of A.I.-bias and its consequential results on society.
Her research revealed shocking inequity of facial recognition systems where rates of misidentification of darker-skinned women approach 35%, compared to 0.8% for lighter-skinned men and 0.3% for white men documenting extreme biases based on gender and skin tone built into widely used technology.
Not surprisingly, those A.I. algorithms were trained on faces in online news – 78% male, 84% white – with the image of George W. Bush appearing 530 times in the sample, more than twice those of all black women combined.
The rise of A.I. presents society with major challenges at a time of economic and political peril. Deep fake videos perpetuate misinformation, driving divisiveness and further aggravating human biases built into algorithms, cycling back to further augment mistrust of the public institutions meant to help We-the-people.
A society swept up by A.I. may come to place the non-physical, much as Christianity in the early Middle Ages focused on life after death over the quality of life in that time, and care less about global warming, sanitation and human rights.
Congress must act now to guarantee the safety of A.I. models and ensure they are used in a responsible manner.
Despite a concerted attempt by the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans to stop and reverse regulation of A.I. in the Biased Bloated Bill, the provision that would have prohibited state and local governments from enforcing any such failed on the Senate floor with a 99-1 vote.
For the moment saner minds have the opportunity to prevail against the heavily financed forces leaning on our me-me leadership.
But that means we can never rest in the fight against those who would unleash inorganic intelligence.
With so many addicted to their Chatbot buddies, mankind risks virtual “beings” gaining the upper hand over human beings, entrenching the importance of A.I. and giving it/them the power of legal entities with all such rights and privileges. Including the right to vote.
(Liz Amsden is a former Angeleno now living in Vermont and a regular CityWatch contributor. She writes on issues she’s passionate about, including social justice, government accountability, and community empowerment. Liz brings a sharp, activist voice to her commentary and continues to engage with Los Angeles civic affairs from afar. She can be reached at [email protected].)
