"Common Sense Is Not So Common"
-Voltaire
Without the critical "Amygdala Neurology" - arguably the brain's second most important functional area, and the center of the human brain's ever-changing, emotional and ethical intelligence - it will be forever impossible for any AI system or modeling to actually perform and create the measurements and interpretations of subjective variables and attributes of complex states, systems or simple constructs (e.g. economics, paintings, music, climate, poems, and so on...); as there is no objective way to determine the right subjective processor (i.e. whom has the best Amygdala to copy?) for these tasks - that would also be theoretically matched and integrated with the best objective processor intended to emulate the collective functions of the brain's cortices, hypocampus, hypothalamus and other brain areas dynamically involved in its non-subjective processing work.
Because it is impossible to clinically ascertain and measure who among us has the best or what is the best neurological pathology of the Amygdala, AI really can hence never truly emulate - the human brain's random biological, emotional and ethical intelligence functions - meaning artificially integrated dynamic intelligence processing outside this human organ cannot and will never occur. (Unless it is ironically chosen subjectively, and biological dynamics are ignored) In other words, without the dynamic subjectivity provided by the Amygdala's neurology -
AI will "never truly exist" as a proxy or stand-in for human intelligence and is doomed to always remain, either a very poor second cousin - or, at best - play a supporting cast role, without the means of emulating this brain area's highly subjective emotional and ethical dynamic processes!
Which after all these hundreds of years also goes to further prove Socrates' famous philosophical conclusion: "the only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing"
Or one could also wisely say it another way, that outside the boundaries and outcomes of pure mathematics or logic - "there is absolutely and truly no right answer... "
Or one could also wisely say it another way, that outside the boundaries and outcomes of pure mathematics or logic - "there is absolutely and truly no right answer... "
T. McNeil
April 7, 2019
April 7, 2019
THE PROBLEM WITH AI ETHICS
Is Big Tech’s embrace of AI ethics boards actually helping anyone?
By
Last week, Google announced that it is creating a new external ethics board to guide its “responsible development of AI.” On the face of it, this seemed like an admirable move, but the company was hit with immediate criticism.
Researchers from Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and top universities objected to the board’s inclusion of Kay Coles James, the president of right-wing think tank The Heritage Foundation. They pointed out that James and her organization campaign against anti-discrimination laws for LGBTQ groups and sponsor climate change denial, making her unfit to offer ethical advice to the world’s most powerful AI company. An open petition demanding James’ removal was launched (it currently has more than 1,700 signatures), and as part of the backlash, one member of the newly formed board resigned.
Google has yet to say anything about all of this (it didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment from The Verge), but to many in the AI community, it’s a clear example of Big Tech’s inability to deal honestly and openly with the ethics of its work.
LEARN MORE
More Thoughts on Limits of AI
