We don’t understand AI because we don’t understand intelligence

Artificial intelligence prophets including Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking and Raymond Kurzweil predict that by the year 2030 machines will develop consciousness through the application of human intelligence. This will lead to a variety of benign, neutral and terrifying outcomes. For example, Musk, Hawking and dozens of other researchers signed a petition in January 2015 that claimed AI-driven machines could lead to “the eradication of disease and poverty” in the near future. This is, clearly, a benign outcome.

And then there’s the neutral result: Kurzweil, who first posited the idea of the technological singularity, believes that by the 2030s people will be able to upload their minds, melding man with machine. On the terrifying side of things, Musk envisions a future where humans will essentially be house cats to our software-based overlords, while Kurzweil takes it a step further, suggesting that humans will essentially be eradicated in favor of intelligent machines.

These claims are not ludicrous on their own. We’ve seen rapid advancements in technology over the past decades; we know computers are growing more powerful and more accessible by the month. Already in 2011, a supercomputer named Watson won a game of Jeopardy against two former champions, using a mixture of AI and all-important natural-language processing. The future is here and it may soon outstrip us.

Kurzweil’s timeline of the technological singularity is based on the law of accelerating returns, wherein the more powerful computers become, the faster they advance. It’s a timeline of extreme exponential growth, and right now we’re smacking into the steep curve that leads to conscious machines and a world where robots are the dominant creatures on earth.

That’s what Kurzweil believes. That’s what Musk, Hawking and many other AI scientists believe. And isn’t that a human thing, to believe in something? However, by 2045, belief will also be a machine thing, according to these researchers. We just need to create the most advanced AI possible, and then bam — conscious machines.

This is where they lose me.

I agree that technology will continue to advance in unprecedented, accelerated ways; we’re seeing this happen right now, and there’s no reason to believe we are anywhere near a computational plateau. However, it is a huge leap from advanced technology to the artificial creation of consciousness. Essentially, the most extreme promises of AI are based on a flawed premise: that we understand human intelligence and consciousness.

AI experts are working with a specific definition of intelligence, namely the ability to learn, recognize patterns, display emotional behaviors and solve analytical problems. However, this is just one definition of intelligence in a sea of contested, vaguely formed ideas about the nature of cognition. Neuroscience and neuropsychology don’t provide a definition of human intelligence — rather, they have many. Different fields, even different researchers, identify intelligence in disparate terms.

Broadly, scientists regard intelligence as the ability to adapt to an environment while realizing personal goals, or even as the ability to select the best response to a particular setting. However, this is based largely on the biological understanding of intelligence, as it relates to evolution and natural selection. In practice, neuroscientists and psychologists offer competing ideas of human intelligence within and outside of their respective fields.

Consider the following overview from psychologists Michael C. Ramsay and Cecil R. Reynolds:

“Theorists have proposed, and researchers have reported, that intelligence is a set of relatively stable abilities, which change only slowly over time. Although intelligence can be seen as a potential, it does not appear to be an inherent fixed or unalterable characteristic. … Contemporary psychologists and other scientists hold that intelligence results from a complex interaction of environmental and genetic influences. Despite more than one hundred years of research, this interaction remains poorly understood and detailed. Finally, intelligence is neither purely biological nor purely social in its origins. Some authors have suggested that intelligence is whatever intelligence tests measure.”

This does not describe a field flush with consensus. And psychology is just one of a dozen industries concerned with the human brain, mind and intelligence.

Our understanding of technology may be advancing at an ever-accelerating rate, but our knowledge of these more vague concepts — intelligence, consciousness, what the human mind even is — remains in a ridiculously infantile stage. Technology may be poised to usher in an era of computer-based humanity, but neuroscience, psychology and philosophy are not. They’re universes away from even landing on technology’s planet, and these gaps in knowledge will surely drag down the projected AI timeline.

Most experts who study the brain and mind generally agree on at least two things: We do not know, concretely and unanimously, what intelligence is. And we do not know what consciousness is.

“To achieve the singularity, it isn’t enough to just run today’s software faster,” Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen wrote in 2011. “We would also need to build smarter and more capable software programs. Creating this kind of advanced software requires a prior scientific understanding of the foundations of human cognition, and we are just scraping the surface of this.”

Defining human intelligence and consciousness is still more philosophy than neuroscience. So let’s get philosophical.

Conscious creativity

Musk, Kurzweil and other proponents of the technological singularity suggest over and over again that ever-increasing computational power will automatically lead to human intelligence and machine consciousness. They imply that the more rapidly technology advances, the more rapidly other scientific fields will also advance.

“It is not my position that just having powerful enough computers, powerful enough hardware, will give us human-level intelligence,” Kurzweil said in 2006. “We need to understand the principles of operation of the human intelligence, how the human brain performs these functions. What is the software, what is the algorithms, what is the content? And for that we look to another grand project, which I label reverse-engineering the human brain, understanding its methods. And we see the same exponential progress we see in other fields, like biology.”

Kurzweil recognizes the need to understand human intelligence before accurately rebuilding it in a machine, but his solution, reverse-engineering a brain, leaps across the fields of neuroscience, psychology and philosophy. It assumes too much — mainly that building a brain is the same thing as building a mind.

These two terms, “brain” and “mind,” are not interchangeable. It’s feasible that we can re-create the brain; it’s an infinitely complex structure, but it’s still a physical thing that can, eventually, be fully mapped, dissected and re-formed. Just this month, IBM announced it had created a working, artificial neuron capable of reliably recognizing patterns in a noisy data landscape while behaving unpredictably — specifically what a natural neuron should do. Creating a neuron is light-years away from rebuilding an entire human brain, but it’s a piece of the puzzle.

However, it’s still not a mind. Even if scientists develop the technology to create an artificial brain, there is no evidence that this process will automatically generate a mind. There’s no guarantee that this machine will suddenly be conscious. How could there be, when we don’t understand the nature of consciousness?

Even if scientists develop the technology to create an artificial brain, there is no evidence that this process will automatically generate a mind.

Consider just one aspect of the mind, consciousness and intelligence: creativity. On its own, creativity is a varied and murky thing for each individual. For one person, the creative process involves spending weeks isolated in a remote cabin; for another, it takes three glasses of whiskey; for still another, creativity manifests in unpredictable flashes of inspiration that last minutes or months at a time. Creativity means intense focus for some and long bouts of procrastination for others.

So tell me: Will AI machines procrastinate?

Perhaps not. The singularity suggests that, eventually, AI will be billions of times more powerful than human intelligence. This means AI will divest itself of messy things like procrastination, mild alcoholism and introversion in order to complete tasks similar to those accomplished by their human counterparts. There’s little doubt that software will one day be able to output beautiful, creative things with minimal (or zero) human input. Beautiful things, but not necessarily better. Creative, but not necessarily conscious.

Singularities

Kurzweil, Musk and others aren’t predicting the existence of Tay the Twitter bot; they’re telling the world that we will, within the next 20 years, copy the human brain, trap it inside an artificial casing and therefore re-create the human mind. No, we’ll create something even better: a mind — whatever that is — that doesn’t need to procrastinate in order to be massively creative. A mind that may or may not be conscious — whatever that means.

The technological singularity may be approaching, but our understanding of psychology, neuroscience and philosophy is far more nebulous, and all of these fields must work in harmony in order for the singularity’s promises to be fulfilled. Scientists have made vast advances in technological fields in recent decades, and computers are growing stronger by the year, but a more powerful computer does not equate to a breakthrough in philosophical understanding. More accurately mapping the brain does not mean we understand the mind.

The technological singularity has a longer tail than the law of accelerating returns suggests. Nothing on earth operates in a vacuum, and before we can create AI machines capable of supporting human intelligence, we need to understand what we’re attempting to imitate. Not ethically or morally, but technically. Before we can even think of re-creating the human brain, we need to unlock the secrets of the human mind.

Hyatt and Starwood hotel chains suffer credit card breach

HEI, the holding company behind a wide number of hotel brands including Marriott and (wait for it) Hyatt, has announced that it suffered a data breach via its payment tools. According to the outfit, hackers installed malware inside payment processing systems that harvested data at point-of-sale kiosks at 19 locations in the US. Specifically, those who made card purchases at specific restaurants, gift shops or spas between March 2015 and July 2016. In total, around 8,000 transactions are likely to be affected, with people’s credit card numbers and addresses potentially at risk.

The company has posted a list of which hotels were targeted, which includes Marriott, Hyatt, Intercontinental, LeMeridien, Renaissance, Sheraton and Westin branches. If you think you’ve been affected, the company advises you to contact your credit card provider and inform them of the situation. In addition, HEI has pledged that its systems are now clean and that its replacement payment processing system is significantly safer than before. Still, when sweating the cost of that $5 bag of chips, you’d never have thought the price would have climbed even higher.

Via: CNET

Source: HEI

Lockheed Martin hopes to turn your kids into astronauts

Lockheed Martin knows that its future spacecraft will only fly if there are enough people interested in flying them, so it’s trying something a bit unusual: it’s helping to raise the next wave of astronauts. It’s launching a Generation Beyond program that gives both parents and teachers the resources they need to get middle school kids (grades 6 through 8) excited about space-related science, engineering and math. The internet curriculum shows would-be spacefarers everything from the challenges of living in space (or on Mars) to the careers they can pursue in space exploration.

There’s also a pair of special initiatives for students. Classrooms will participate in a virtual field trip to Lockheed’s Spacecraft Operations Simulation Center on October 4th. There’s a challenge that will award cash prizes (up to $10,000) for students who produce videos explaining how they would design a Mars habitation module. Potential explorers have until December 15th to enter.

These kinds of education efforts are relatively common in the technology world. Apple even built an app just for teaching programming to kids. However, it’s more than a little rare in the spaceflight industry, where the career path tends to be both longer and less direct (numerous astronauts were previously military pilots, for instance). Lockheed is clearly willing to bet that an investment now will pay off decades down the road.

Source: Lockheed Martin (1), (2), PR Newswire

‘Hamilton’ creator Miranda joins the fight against ticket bots

Hate that ticket bots robbed you of a chance to see that big concert or musical? So does Lin-Manuel Miranda. The Hamilton author is teaming up with Senator Charles Schumer to promote a proposed federal bill, the Better Online Ticket Sales Act (BOTS Act, geddit?), that would fine bot users $16,000 for every ticket they sell. That’s far harsher than in Schumer’s own New York state, where a recently passed law tops out at a $1,000 total fine and no more than a year in prison. Miranda is coming aboard as proof that these bots can do real damage — scalpers made roughly $15.5 million from Hamilton alone, and jacked prices from $189 to as much as $2,000. It’d also start a task force that would detect these bootleggers.

As the star explained at a press conference, a bill like this is likely necessary. There’s “no disincentive” for bot owners right now, and it’s “not fair” to shut out the majority of people who can’t afford to pay outrageous rates to see a show. That’s especially true for a show like Hamilton, he says, since the bots are excluding the common Americans that the musical is trying to reach.

The celebrity move isn’t exactly subtle, but it could be important. While Schumer’s bill is bipartisan, he’s introducing it in September — right at the height of the presidential election frenzy. Miranda might just make the bill stand out amidst the noise and give it a better chance of becoming law.

Via: The Verge

Source: Charles Schumer

Apple Stores Offering Exclusive Jaybird Freedom Earbuds in Rose Gold and Space Gray

Starting this week, Logitech-owned Jaybird’s Freedom Wireless Bluetooth Headphones are available for purchase in two new exclusive colors from the Apple Online Store and Apple retail locations.

Designed to match Apple’s line of iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches, the two exclusive colors include a Space Gray and Rose Gold. The Space Gray Freedom earbuds feature Space Gray highlights on the remote and the earbuds themselves with a black cord and accents, while the Rose Gold earbuds feature a Rose Gold remote and earpieces with a white cord and accents.

Launched earlier this year, the Jaybird Freedom Wireless Bluetooth Headphones have previously been available directly from Jaybird and from third-party retailers in Carbon (black/gray), Gold (gold/white), Blaze (red/silver), and Ocean (blue/silver). The standard colors are not available from Apple Stores.

Jaybird has been designing Bluetooth earbuds since 2007 and the Freedom Wireless Bluetooth Headphones represent the culmination of years of design refinements. The earbuds are the smallest Jaybird has produced yet, thanks to a clever decision to move many of the audio components from the earbuds themselves to the remote control.

Jaybird’s earbuds are wireless and connect to devices over Bluetooth, so they’re able to work with iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, Macs, and more. They’ll be compatible with the upcoming iPhone 7, which rumors suggest will not have a headphone jack. We went hands-on with the Jaybird earbuds earlier this year and while we loved the comfort, the small size, and the battery life, the large remote was a little difficult to deal with.

The Rose Gold and the Space Gray Jaybird Freedom Wireless Bluetooth Headphones, priced at $199.95, are available starting today from the Apple Online Store and many Apple retail stores.

Tags: Apple retail, Jaybird
Discuss this article in our forums

Huawei P9 Plus video review

What you need to know about Huawei’s true 2016 flagship.

You’ve read our Huawei P9 review, but it turns out the P9 isn’t the top tier device for Huawei in 2016. There’s a bigger, badder P9 Plus available in parts of Europe and Asia, with a 5.5-inch screen, a heftier 3,400mAh battery, 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage. But there’s more to the P9 Plus than mere specs, as we’ll explore in our video review.

Check out the video below to find out why the Huawei P9 Plus isn’t just a good phone by the standards of the Chinese manufacturer — it’s actually a great handset all-round.

Report reveals identity of NSA and PRISM surveillance target

It’s been over three years since former NSA contractor Edward Snowden released a trove of documents detailing the extent to which the American government was able to spy on its citizens. A big part of those revelations was PRISM, a system that allowed the government to expediently request and collect data from a variety of huge internet companies including Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and more. Today, a new report from The Intercept contains details on the first person to be identified as a target of PRISM.

Tony Fullman of New Zealand was targeted in 2012 by the NSA in cooperation with the New Zealand Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB). The NSA was able to intercept his Facebook chats and Gmail messages and passed them along to the GCSB, which itself did not have the authority to monitor Fullman’s communications. Fullman was apparently targeted because New Zealand believed that he was planning an act of terrorism, but it turns out that intelligence was incorrect. That didn’t stop the New Zealand government from raiding his home and revoking his passport, however.

It appears that Fullman was on the country’s radar because of his involvement in a “thumbs up for democracy” campaign that was opposed to the authoritarian ruler of Fiji Frank Bainimarama. Between May and August 2012, the NSA kept tabs on Fullman’s communications with other Fiji pro-democracy activists. Fullman himself was born in Fiji before emigrating to New Zealand and eventually becoming a naturalized citizen. But he had spent a few years in Fiji again starting in 2009 before eventually moving to Australia in 2012.

A visit back to New Zealand in July 2012 appears to have kicked off the NSA and New Zealand’s surveillance of Fullman. While in New Zealand, he met with a number of members of the Fiji Movement for Freedom and Democracy, a meeting that caught the eye of the New Zealand government. The country tapped some phones and heard a conversation in which it believed that it heard of a plot to violently overthrow Fiji’s ruler Frank Bainimarama.

When he returned to Australia later that month, Fullman’s house was raided and his passport revoked. He took on legal counsel to fight the charges of planning a violent action to overthrow a government. And from July through August, his communications were monitored via PRISM; the NSA also went back and retrieved some of his communications from May of 2012.

However, the FBI’s surveillance revealed nothing, and neither Fullman nor any of the Fiji campaigners ever faced charges. But The Intercept spoke with Fullman and learned that he still gets pulled out of airport security lines frequently and he’s had trouble finding employment since news reports often link him to the supposed assassination plot. He was never notified by the government that his private communication was monitored by New Zealand with the help of the NSA, a move which might have been illegal.

“To be betrayed by your own country, it’s really hard,” Fullman told The Intercept. “It puts a sour taste in your mouth.” Fullman continues to live in Australia and doubts he’ll return to New Zealand after the treatment he went through. For more on his saga, the full report from The Intercept is well worth a read.

Source: The Intercept

Apple Seeds Sixth Beta of macOS Sierra to Developers

Apple today released the sixth beta of macOS Sierra, the newest operating system designed for the Mac, to developers. macOS Sierra beta 6 comes one week after the release of the fourth beta and two months after the software was first unveiled at Apple’s 2016 Worldwide Developers Conference.

Developers can download today’s beta update through the Apple Developer Center. It should also be available over-the-air shortly using the Software Update mechanism in the Mac App Store.

macOS Sierra is a major update that brings Siri to the Mac for the first time, allowing users to conduct voice searches to quickly find files, look up information, and more. New Continuity features offer an “Auto Unlock” option for unlocking a Mac with an Apple Watch and a “Universal Clipboard” for copying text on one Apple device and pasting it on another.

Deeper iCloud integration allows files stored on the desktop or the Documents folder of a Mac to be accessed on all of a user’s devices, and Photos features deep learning algorithms for improved facial, object, and scene recognition. There’s also a Memories feature for displaying photo collections, and Messages has rich links, bigger emoji, and “Tapback” response options.

Apple Pay is coming to the web in macOS Sierra, with payments authenticated through an iPhone or Apple Watch, and new features like multiple tabs, Picture in Picture multitasking, optimized storage, and revamped emoji are also available.

Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.
macOS Sierra is currently available to developers and public beta testers, and it will see a wider public release this fall. For full details on all of the new features included in macOS Sierra, make sure to check out our macOS Sierra roundup.

Related Roundup: macOS Sierra
Discuss this article in our forums