We’re talking about computers understanding people. Do people understand people?

Actually, as my friend Randy Galbraith once pointed out, computers have been 
writing code for us since 1957 when FORTRAN was first released. More recently 
we have Java … Using Java, you tell the computer what you want it to program, 
and it generates the underlying code.

There have been more and more specialized languages to generate code for 
specific purposes, and we have more and more layers of implementation platforms 
to re-use proven pieces of code at the wave of your hand. The AI thing is just 
an attempt to guess what you want to do, based on how well it understands YOU. 
Good luck!

I’m always amused at attempts at speech recognition. At some point computers 
may do better than people do at understanding what they’re being asked to do, 
but communication is always going to be imperfect, and we will always have GIGO 
(Garbage In, Garbage Out — yeah, I’m not assuming every single reader knew 
that). In discussing software requirements with a long-time co-worker, how many 
times do you have to go back and forth before reaching a full understanding?

Look at the struggle to invent autonomous cars. The fact that software 
*approximates* reality comes to be very painful when navigating a complex 
world. We have flown space probes through millions of miles of nothingness, 
using mathematics with astounding success. But downtown Boston is a different 
story, and forget about Tehran where you get through a blind intersection by 
gunning it. The AI that can re-use the solutions to past problems is 
efficiency. But the new problems are still a problem, especially when we 
mistake them for old problems.

Back in the 1980s, during Engineers' Week, Edsger Dijkstra came to Honeywell 
Information Systems in Phoenix to give us a presentation on proof of code 
correctness. After Part 1 we had a break, and I chatted with him over a coke. I 
said that my experience was spending most of my time trying to understand 
exactly what we wanted a program to do, with the actual coding being a minor 
problem. He nodded in agreement, and said he should address this after the 
break.

Resuming the presentation, he spoke somewhat like this: I have neglected to 
clarify the scope of my discussion. There are two aspects to software 
development: the Pleasantness Problem and the Correctness Problem. I have been 
addressing the Correctness Problem, and the correctness of code can indeed be 
proven. But the Pleasantness Problem is not provable: if you cannot correctly 
determine the goal of your program, then the code may still correctly implement 
the requirements, but may still be simply wrong.

Aaron, have no fear. What we create is still US, for good or ill. Maybe the 
tool can produce faster or in more volume, and sometimes the results will 
surprise us, but the problem will always be GIGO. So don’t blame Microsoft if 
their AI starts a riot: the same crooks, snowflakes and bigots will be behind 
the trouble.

Victor
___________

On Mar 9, 2017, at 08:47:29, Anon Anon <[email protected]> wrote:

Tay AI but with the ability to propagate her hate beyond just memes and catch 
phrases.

It took less than 24 hours to teach Tay to be a Nazi and to espouse hate 
speech. Her previous code is still in the new stuff somewhere because if you 
ask her questions about Tay, she expresses regret about certain things.

How long until they teach this one how to create html filled with explitives 
and hate speech? Since all Tay could do was tweet, now this one could use Azure 
to really get the message out.

Microsoft... Please stop.

On Mar 9, 2017 07:11, "Keith Smith" <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

In the hands of good people this can be great.  In the hands of evil people 
this could be the end.  Think CIA, NSA.... Those wanting to control man kind.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/microsoft-has-created-ai-can-write-its-own-code-quharrison-terry
 
<https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/microsoft-has-created-ai-can-write-its-own-code-quharrison-terry>


-- 
Keith Smith
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss 
<http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

Reply via email to