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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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, ...
Post a Comment
Read more