The New Breed - Kate Darling ****

This book is based on a fascinating concept - that we've got robots all wrong. Kate Darling is admittedly a robot enthusiast, but she makes a convincing argument that too often we compare robots to humans, where a more useful parallel might be domesticated animals. As Darling shows, most of things that worry us about robots, whether it's their usurping us or needing robot rights, are concerns that have already been developed in some depth when we think of animals.

Darling also suggests that long term we don't need to worry about robots taking our jobs, just as the luddites didn't need to worry about technology - robots can and will cause disruption, but long term the outcome is more likely to be beneficial than negative. Darling also points out that predictions of robots doing more generalised tasks tend to hugely over-promise. Self-driving cars, for example, still have a long way to go and many robotic devices still need human oversight. (You might not think of self-driving cars as robots, but one of the underlying themes here is that useful robots are hardly ever the SF humanoid cliché.)

This isn't a totally rose-tinted picture, though. Darling does remind us of the issues faced by anything making life-changing decisions for us based on artificial intelligence - but overall, with the right safeguards, she is enthusiastic about a future where robots will have a similar relation to us as pets and working animals.

The one shame about this book is that it didn't have a science writer as co-author. Although Darling starts off in a chatty fashion, the writing suffers considerably from needing a good writer's oversight, to cut down on the significant amount of repetition and to give more sense of narrative to what can often seem like a collection of facts and ideas with insufficient structure. There is also too much on the history of animal domestication and animal rights - it needed to be fed in, but not to have whole chapters dedicated to it. It might also have helped with some of the prehistoric context. For example we are told that humans have punished animals for hundreds of thousands of years - that's a bit of a stretch.

Overall, though, despite some writing issues, the book is thought-provoking and at a time when the ethics of AI and robotics is a popular topic, provides genuinely novel insights and imagination.

Hardback:

Bookshop.org

Kindle:

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

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, ...

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here. We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...

Search This Blog