Ben Cannon wrote:
To follow - Siri couldn’t figure out how to add an entry to my
calendar today. I am yet to be afraid.
Although the google bot that placed a call to book a haircut
was impressive.
"Siri, book dinner with my wife, on our anniversary." Be afraid,
VERY afraid. :-)
Miles
Ms.
Lady Benjamin PD Cannon, ASCE
6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC
CEO
ben@6by7.net
"The only fully end-to-end encrypted global
telecommunications company in the world.”
FCC License KJ6FJJ
Sent
from my iPhone via RFC1149.
Miles,
You realize that “AI” as general artificial
intelligence is science fiction, right? There is no
general AI, and even ML is not actually learning in the
sense that humans or animals learn. “Neural networks”,
likewise, have nothing to do at all with the way
biological neurons work in cognition (which science
doesn’t understand). That’s all mythology, amplified by
science fiction and TV fantasies like Star Trek’s
character “Data”. It’s just anthropomorphizing technology.
We create unnecessary risk when we anthropomorphize
technology. The truth is, any kind of automation incurs
risk. There is nothing related to intelligence, AI or
otherwise. It’s all just automation to varying degrees.
ML, for example, simply builds data structures based on
prior input, and uses those structures to guide future
actions. But that’s not general behavior — it all has to
be purpose-designed for specific tasks.
The Musk-stoked fear that if we build automated
systems and then “put them together” in the same network,
or whatever, that they will somehow gain new capabilities
not originally designed and go on a rampage is just plain
silly. Mongering that fear, however, is quite lucrative.
It’s up to us, the real technologists, to smack down the
fear mongers and tell truth, not hype.
Since the academics’ promised general intelligence of
AI never materialized, they had to dumb-down their
terminology, and came up with “narrow AI”. Or “not AI”, as
I prefer to say. But narrow AI is mathematically
indistinguishable from any other kind of automation, and
it has nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence, which
science doesn’t remotely yet understand. It’s all
automation, all the time.
All automated systems require safeguards. If you don’t
put safeguards in, things blow up: rockets on launchpads,
guns on ships, Ansible on steroids. When things blow up,
it’s never because systems unilaterally exploited general
intelligence to “hook up” and become self-smarted. It’s
because you were stupid.
For a nice, rational look at why general AI is
fiction, and what “narrow AI”, such as ML, can actually
do, get Meredith Broussard’s excellent book "Artificial
Unintelligence - How computers misunderstand the world".
https://www.amazon.com/Artificial-Unintelligence-Computers-Misunderstand-World/dp/026253701X
Or if you prefer a video summary, she has a quick talk
on YouTube, "ERROR – The Art of Imperfection Conference:
The Fragile”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuDFhSUwOAQ
At 2:20 into the video, she puts the kibosh on the
mythology of general AI.
-mel
On Dec 9, 2020, at 11:07 AM,
Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:
Hi Folks,
It occurs to me that network
& systems admins are the the folks who really have
to worry about AI threats.
After watching yet another AI
takes over the world show - you know, the
same general theme, AI wipes
out humans to preserve its existence - it
occurred to me:
Perhaps the real AI threat is
"self-healing systems" gone wild. Consider:
- automated system management
- automated load management
- automated resource
management - spin up more instances of <whatever>
as necessary
- automated threat detection
& response
- automated vulnerability
analysis & response
Put them together, and the
nightmare scenario is:
- machine learning algorithm
detects need for more resources
- machine learning algorithm
makes use of vulnerability analysis library
to find other systems with
resources to spare, and starts attaching
those resources
- unbounded demand for more
resources
Kind of what spambots have
done to the global email system.
"For Homo Sapiens, the
telephone bell had tolled."
(Dial F for Frankenstein,
Arthur C. Clarke)
I think I need to start
putting whisky in my morning coffee. And maybe not
thinking
about NOT replacing third
shift with AI tools.
Miles Fidelman
--
In theory, there is no
difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. ....
Yogi Berra
Theory is when you know
everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything
works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and
practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows
why. ... unknown
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why. ... unknown