Skip to main content

Will AI Replace Us? - Shelly Fan ***

Although a review should largely be about the content of a book - and we'll get onto that - sometimes, the format it is presented in can have such an impact that this comes to the fore. Will AI Replace Us? falls into this category as part of Thames & Hudson's The Big Idea series which makes use of 'Quick recognition text hierarchy'. Throughout the book there are four different font sizes used. The idea is that you can read the biggest two sizes to get an overview in about half an hour, add in the next size down for an hour's quick read, or go the whole hog for a two-hour in-depth read.

It's an interesting concept, but the execution is horrible. The designer seems to have no idea how book pages should be laid out. The text is chunky sans serif - hard on the eyes on paper - and has far too little white space, getting uncomfortably close to the edge of the page and looking like it has been thrown in, rather than carefully set. To make matters worse, there are two other text styles - a tiny one for image captions and another for hypertext-like definitions of phrases (which are heavily highlighted in the text), causing more visual confusion. That attempt at imitating hypertext reflects the reality that this approach would work far better on a web page, where you can have proper hypertext and collapse lower level sections without resorting to eye-crunching text size differences. It just doesn't work well as a book format. It's novel and creative, which is excellent - but a key lesson of creativity is that you will sometimes fail. And this is one of those times.

As for the content on artificial intelligence, it's a mix of so-so history, good on the science, over-enthusiasm about achievements and interesting lengthy consideration of ethics and impacts - the last of which is probably the best.

A couple of examples of iffy history: in the caption for the Science Museum's Difference Engine (rather disappointing it isn't mentioned where it is) we are told it was 'based on Babbage's original drawings of the Analytical Engine' - but, of course the Difference Engine and the Analytical Engine were totally different things. The text is also fast and loose with Ada Lovelace's role. We're told 'Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace originated the concept of... the Analytical Engine' - where Lovelace's first involvement was a commentary on someone else's paper on Babbage's idea - there is no basis for the suggestion she was involved in the origination of the design.

Similarly, the early work on expert systems is made to sound like a commercial triumph, talking of the 'dominant success of the first AI boom' and 'AI seemed unstoppable.' It really didn't - it seemed niche and rapidly collapsed. Later we get a lot of material on self-driving cars, which spends some time addressing the societal issues of killing people, but doesn't take on the essential point that the statistical argument of hypothetical lives saved is of little value to the families of those killed. We're told that people's concerns are about a lack of understanding of AI mechanisms, but that's really not what this is about. Nevertheless, along with the descriptions of the technology, the parts of the book focusing on the ethics of AI are the best, engaging the reader in thought about the implications of the technology.

Oddly, the 'future' section seemed one of the most dull, in part because it focussed on medical applications - which tend to be worthy but not something we think of in everyday life terms. Even so, it covered the issues well.

A distinct curate's egg, then. The format is wonderfully creative but really gets in the way of the message. And there are some useful spoonfuls of information in that egg, if you can get past the problems.
Paperback:  
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...
Post a Comment
Read more

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...
Post a Comment
Read more