“Magical” AI

Liam Justiniano- Week 3

I found it very interesting how far AI has developed within the past year. It’s seemed to just pop up on the scene wiping everything out. However, after the readings it’s really interesting to see how extensive the process behind AI is. The linguistics behind the term “artificial intelligence” is not something I really thought about prior to “Empire of AI” by Karen Hao. The original term before it was “rebranded” was “automata studies”. “Automata studies” didn’t catch on, according to Hao, because it didn’t attract enough attention. 

I think that language puts the reality of what AI is really doing into perspective. We see this sort of mystification of Artificial Intelligence, I see it all the time with the companies using AI and they seem to try and market it as something magical. When in reality it is a very concrete and real thing. It’s an automated machine of inputs and outputs. I believe that automata studies demystifies the process and I’m curious that if we were able to continue using that phrase or a similar phrase how AI would be reframed. 

Something else I found interesting was how unethical the origins of AI really were. Unconsenting people were forced to become datasets for these big tech companies to develop their products. It seems like hundreds and hundreds of people without their knowledge or consent were used. It feels extremely odd to me. I also found the usage of mugshots very concerning. The way Hao discussed it seemed as though they were using mugshots to compile a “criminal look”. Mugshots are taken at the time of arrest and not when convicted of a crime and I had to stop and reread it because I wasn’t quite sure if what I was reading was correct. I’m still not sure if that was correct because it just doesn’t seem right. I couldn’t help but sit and think of all the possible things that could go wrong based off of that and how unfair that could possibly be. 

I really enjoyed Crawford using Clever Hans as an opening. It shows how amazement can really get in the way of genuine research and science. The amazement of the horse seemed to blind people to the real research and even once they researched it took a while for them to come up with concrete arguments against Clever Hans. When they found out the real trick was just something as simple as body language that gave the answers away it seemed very funny. The horse still holds some sort of intelligence, but no more than teaching it its normal tricks and routines. A simple understanding of input and output, A leads to B. I enjoyed the simplification and demystification that Clever Hans sort of relays to bring in my original point. I enjoyed both of these pieces.