At 01:55 AM 31/01/2014, Rick Welykochy wrote: >The level of critical thinking and analysis in this article is >zero. The dangers >inherent in the misapplication of "deep learning-enhanced AI" are all too >obvious and dystopic. And yet the reporter blithely reports this as being some >benign acceptable development.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/29/facebooks-plan-for-artificial-intelligence_n_4690949.html I read it again to see why you would say that, Rick. What caught my attention from front page headline for this in the first place was that it was a creepy thing. "Facebook's Artificial Intelligence Plans Are Pretty Creepy" is what it says. So my head was in the 'let's be critical' space when I read it. However, when I read it plain, without the initial grab, I can see how you would read it as zero analysis and just reporting a story. Perhaps it wasn't meant to be analytical or critical, but an advisory of Facebook's continuing data collection, only this time with even more AI. I think perhaps it wasn't blithe, but straight reporting (for a change). Here's another, only about Google's AI efforts, also by Bianca Google's New A.I. Ethics Board May Decide If Our Species Survives http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/29/google-ai_n_4683343.html?utm_hp_ref=technology A much more in depth article. Jan Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [email protected] Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
