Skip to main content

A Citizen's Guide to Artificial Intelligence - John Zerilli et al ****

The cover of this book set off a couple of alarm bells. Not only does that 'Citizen's Guide' part of the title raise the spectre of a pompous book-length moan, the list of seven authors gives the feel of a thesis written by committee. It was a real pleasure, then, to discover that this is actually a very good book.

I ought to say straight away what it isn't - despite that title, it isn't a book written in a style that's necessarily ideal for a general audience. Although the approach is often surprisingly warm and human, it is an academic piece of writing. As a result, in places it's a bit of a trudge to get through it. Despite this, though, the topic is important enough - and, to be fair, the way it is approached is good enough - that it deserves to be widely read.

John Zerilli et al give an effective, very balanced exploration of artificial intelligence. Although not structured as such, it's a SWOT analysis, giving us the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of AI. Of course we get the concerns that have been repeatedly raised in books such as Weapons of Math Destruction that artificial intelligence and big data can result in opaque decision making that influences our lives and that can have unintentional biases baked into the systems. But we also see the potential benefits of AI and rather than just bemoaning the dangers, there is real consideration of the checks and balances that can be put in place to make use of it without suffering from its unwanted side-effects.

Some aspects really jump out at the reader, for me particularly around what is and isn't possible as far as transparency goes, and making the very important point that we should not judge AI in isolation but have to weigh it up against the lack of transparency and biases that human decision makers also have. Similarly, for example, when talking about self-driving cars, there is a discussion of the challenging aspect where a famous ethical puzzle, the trolley problem, is brought to life: how should a car judge priorities if, say, it had the choice of saving the driver or a cyclist, or has to choose between the life of the driver or a group of children on the pavement. As Zerilli et al point out, we all might favour saving the children in principle, but would you buy a car that is prepared to intentionally kill the driver?

The book's academic origin comes through in the care with which it drills down into things we tend to take for granted. So, for instance, there is a box explaining the difference between 'appeal' and 'review' in responding to legal and governmental decisions that some considers incorrect. That particular example was quite interesting, though overall this approach does contribute to the parts of the book that are quite hard going.

Despite being relatively heavyweight reading, this is a different take on AI to any I've read before. It focusses on how AI will affect our lives and how we as a society should react to it. At the very least it should be recommended reading for those in government who are having to make decisions in this area - and deserves a significantly wider readership too.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re