#632 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Wednesday April 12)
Good morning,
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR WELL ORGANIZED INFORMATION FROM A SEARCH ENGINE?
Chat GBT and its ilk, capable of drawing together facts and the way we speak from across the Internet and composing it into often quite literate prose, has captured our imaginations. These systems lie somewhere between search engine and the actual ability to synthesize information and draw conclusions and comparisons. But we’re getting pretty close.
Today, the prospect of Artificial Intelligence, as popularized by Chat GBT, is something of a parlor game. One can enter a subject and provide some direction, only to witness the website spew out what appears to be a carefully constructed article, written by someone expert in the field.
As a bit of a diversion, and acknowledging my love of the dystopian genre, consider the following:
DYSTOPIAN MOVIES
Dystopian movies have been a staple of science fiction for decades, and they continue to be a popular genre today. These films offer a glimpse into a future where society has broken down, and the government holds too much power. They explore themes such as oppression, rebellion, and the dangers of blindly following authority. Some of the most famous dystopian movies include "1984", "Blade Runner", "The Hunger Games", "The Handmaid's Tale", and "The Matrix".
"1984" directed by Michael Radford, is a classic dystopian film that is based on the novel of the same name by George Orwell. The story is set in a totalitarian society where the government exerts complete control over its citizens' lives. The film is a stark reminder of the dangers of totalitarianism and the importance of free speech.
"Blade Runner" directed by Ridley Scott is set in a future where advanced technology has led to the creation of genetically engineered humans known as replicants. The film explores the ethical implications of creating and exploiting artificial life, and the blurred line between human and machine.
"The Hunger Games" directed by Gary Ross, is based on the novel of the same name by Suzanne Collins. The story is set in a future society where the government controls the population through a brutal annual event known as the Hunger Games. The film explores themes of government control, rebellion, and the power of media manipulation.
"The Handmaid's Tale" directed by Volker Schlöndorff, is based on the novel of the same name by Margaret Atwood. Set in a future society where women have been stripped of their rights and forced into a reproductive role, the film explores themes of oppression, gender inequality, and resistance.
"The Matrix" directed by the Wachowski Brothers, is set in a future where humanity is enslaved by machines. The film explores themes of rebellion, the nature of reality, and the power of technology over human life.
These films are not only entertaining but also thought-provoking, they make us question our own society, and the direction in which it is heading. They serve as a warning to us all, reminding us that we must be vigilant and actively work to ensure that the future they depict remains only a work of fiction.
THAT WASN’T WRITTEN BY ME
The above came from the Chat GBT website. I simply asked “write something about dystopian movies” and that’s what popped out. Obviously, this is pretty literate stuff, but it’s basically little more than the information I would get from Google, manipulated into prose form.
The above doesn’t reflect a dispositive list of dystopian films, and it doesn’t attempt to trace the development of the genre and the interrelationship of the various plotlines, nor the relative quality of the productions. It doesn’t offer a qualitative analysis of the various films and (at least now) can’t discuss the comparisons to the books from which they were adapted, the directorial choices that were made, the quality of the cinematography, or the believability of the acting.
Artificial Intelligence can get more sophisticated than the above short piece on dystopian movies. One can make increasingly more complex inquiries, as when one might request comparisons of different genres or literary pieces. The system starts by guessing, among other things, the words being used, starting with the nouns that direct it toward the research required. It also can draw conclusions based on word frequency. Further, the intent of the question and the likely intended types of can be divined from the nature and wording of the question. Let’s remember that there is a vast storehouse of writing available on-line, from which a sophisticated program can draw. But, in the end, it must rely upon the information available to it on line and the reasoning and the coding of its “creators.”
It will be a while before computers can detect a lie or discern nuance, or understand when something is an exaggeration for effect (“I could eat a horse”). How to determine whether a human interlocutor is telling a bald-faced lie or simply engaging in puffery (e.g., “this is the greatest car on the road”). It is all so complicated.
Needless to say, education will not be the same. Artificial intelligence and the ability to use computers to write for us already is creating quite a problem for directed research for high school and college classes. That said, I suspect the next innovation will be a means to “test” papers that are submitted through a program that can determine the originality of the piece. Still, it’s problematic and will force changes to the current system of education.
CAN COMPUTOR GENERATED RESPONSES REPLACE PEOPLE?
This stuff is creepy and dangerous. Mixed in with the ability to create “deep fakes” that are indecipherable to the naked eye, we are reaching the point of toxic misrepresentation of what people actually believe or say. It will become difficult to discern truth, as if Twitter didn’t make it hard enough already. How will we be able to keep track of the words and images of “real people,” versus computer-generated animations of these people, spewing whatever the creator of the program (or user of the program) decides? What will this do to our democracy? What will become of the truth and the ability to separate it from fiction? It has been pointed out that artificial intelligence already has the capacity to mimic the writing style and the references to research articles that one might find in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) or similar publication. When one can read an article containing not only prose that resembles what one could expect in such a journal, but also faked research papers, data sets, and charts, will the public health also be at risk?
I read an article recently, questioning whether artificial intelligence could replace the pastoral duties of a rabbi (or other clergy). It’s an interesting question but the answer is, at least for now, still evident. The computer may be able to gather and sort information to produce what more often than not is a cogent analysis. But it lacks the humanity to interact meaningfully and sensitively.
As much as a computer may be able to mimic the dramatic style of Shakespeare or Stoppard or the poetry of Mary Oliver or Emily Dickinson, no computer can express their fundamental humanity or truly respond as they would to a sight or circumstance. A computer cannot reach back to personal experience of loss or love, pride or pathos. Human emotion, success and failures, aspiration and compassion are ineffable. I’m not sure computers ever will be able to think. I am quite sure they will not learn to feel. And they certainly cannot offer a helping hand or a shoulder to cry on.
It's still a curiosity and a parlor game. It may never be a sentient entity (I, for one, believe it will not). Yet, there will be questions of ethics to be considered as artificial intelligence and their creators become more capable of fooling us into believing that a computer generated response is no different from a human response.
Have a great day,
Glenn
From the archives: