The title of the article spells out its content nicely: Bill Gates is concerned about overdeveloping artificial intelligence. It seems strange, though, that one of the front-runners in computer and software development would be opposed to the next logical step. Gates stands to make another fortune by trying to push into the AI world, and there seems to be a substantial team at Microsoft that is moving in that direction. In our class lecture we observed Steve Jobs mention he would "rather be successful than right," and in this case, it seems Gates is moving in the opposite direction. Promoting AI seems to be the "successful" idea. It's interesting that Gates seems to be more focused on what he feels is right now that his empire is so large. His fledgling company seemed to play both sides of the early PC wars just to make money, but now Gates seems to be asking himself the question that Jurassic Park's Dr Ian Malcom accused park owner John Hammond of ignoring: "...but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Current Event Post 1
A post in response to classroom discussion and content found at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2015/01/28/bill-gates-also-worries-artificial-intelligence-is-a-threat/
The title of the article spells out its content nicely: Bill Gates is concerned about overdeveloping artificial intelligence. It seems strange, though, that one of the front-runners in computer and software development would be opposed to the next logical step. Gates stands to make another fortune by trying to push into the AI world, and there seems to be a substantial team at Microsoft that is moving in that direction. In our class lecture we observed Steve Jobs mention he would "rather be successful than right," and in this case, it seems Gates is moving in the opposite direction. Promoting AI seems to be the "successful" idea. It's interesting that Gates seems to be more focused on what he feels is right now that his empire is so large. His fledgling company seemed to play both sides of the early PC wars just to make money, but now Gates seems to be asking himself the question that Jurassic Park's Dr Ian Malcom accused park owner John Hammond of ignoring: "...but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."
The title of the article spells out its content nicely: Bill Gates is concerned about overdeveloping artificial intelligence. It seems strange, though, that one of the front-runners in computer and software development would be opposed to the next logical step. Gates stands to make another fortune by trying to push into the AI world, and there seems to be a substantial team at Microsoft that is moving in that direction. In our class lecture we observed Steve Jobs mention he would "rather be successful than right," and in this case, it seems Gates is moving in the opposite direction. Promoting AI seems to be the "successful" idea. It's interesting that Gates seems to be more focused on what he feels is right now that his empire is so large. His fledgling company seemed to play both sides of the early PC wars just to make money, but now Gates seems to be asking himself the question that Jurassic Park's Dr Ian Malcom accused park owner John Hammond of ignoring: "...but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Module One Review
- I can see the value in learning the art of observation, but at a university level, I would have thought the instructor would have given some kind of guidance. Except for a professor telling you to keep looking, anyone could buy a fish and stare at it. What was his tuition going towards?
- The last order of ignorance has to be a joke. There's no way that's actually part of a hierarchy of problem solving.
- Donald Rumsfeld caught a lot of flack for essentially restating the Orders of Ignorance. He called them "known knowns," "known unknowns," and "unknown unknowns." I feel like that is a lot more clear of a summation.
- Information without proper interpretation is essentially useless.
- It seems that a lot of the ethical "dilemmas" we discuss are only dilemmas if you don't know where you already stand on an issue. They aren't really problems if your moral compass is already finely attuned.
- Is it unethical to disobey an unethical rule? Is inaction the best course when your are compelled by law or force to do something that is unethical?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)