Skip to main content

AI in the Wild - Peter Dauvergne ***

Sometimes a science book can highlight a totally new connection between two disciplines, and that was certainly the case here - linking environmental science and sustainability with artificial intelligence. Peter Dauvergne shows how (as is also in the case in many other fields) AI can both be a positive and a negative influence on the environment.

On the plus side, we see how AI is being used for everything from sending semi-intelligent drones out to look after the Great Barrier Reef to detecting illegal activities in protected areas by monitoring sounds and identifying those identified with, say, illegal logging in a forest. Perhaps the biggest impact comes from the use of AI in smart resources to reduce climate impact of everything from domestic houses to data centres.

This is all great stuff, but Dauvergne also shows the dangers that AI can present to the environment. This can come from misuse of the technology, but also from the resources needed to make the technology work. Often this results in a balancing act. So, for example, self-driving electric cars are good for the environment when used, but have a negative impact when the raw materials for the batteries and electronics are mined. What we don't really get is a feel for how to quantify this balance. This is a notoriously difficult activity - see, for example, the (failed) attempts to assess which is more environmentally friendly of reusable and disposable nappies.

The subject, then, is important, and Dauvergne uncovers some real positives and issues than many readers will not find familiar. However, the way he goes about it is not great. I was struck by one of the blurb comments on the back where a professor says 'this book is as fast-paced and thrilling as any sci-fi storyline.' All I can say is, this professor must read really boring novels, as the writing style here is classic dull academic: the book is packed with fact statements and is almost entirely lacking in any narrative flow.

To make matters worse, a lot of these statements that are thrown at us are not backed up with evidence or balance. As an example, there are dramatic statements of the way AI is sweeping the world, for example in the deployment of self-driving cars - but very little about all the issues self-driving car manufacturers face in going from localised trials to proper implementation, for example, the limitations of computer image recognition which can be fooled by small constructed patterns and the lack of consideration of resistance to the very idea of self-driving cars as more people are killed by them. 

The author's politics also come through extremely strongly, which leads to the extension of the argument well beyond the environment, diluting the thrust of the book. So, for example, we are told (without evidence) that ‘Global sustainability is going to require a fairer, more just distribution of wealth and resources’. I am not saying this is necessarily untrue, but it’s not an obvious conclusion and it's not really about the environment. Dauvergne emphasises the existence of inequality but doesn’t mention the vast improvements in the circumstances of many at the bottom end of this scale - it's almost as if Hans Rosling's Factfulness didn't exist.

There's a core of interesting and useful information here, but it's a shame it's not presented better.

Paperback:

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...