Skip to main content

The Atomic Human - Neil Lawrence ****

This is a real curate’s egg of a book. Let’s start with the title - it feels totally wrong for what the book’s about. ‘The Atomic Human’ conjures up some second rate superhero. What Neil Lawrence is getting at is the way atoms were originally conceived as what you get when you pare back more and more until what’s left is uncuttable. The idea is that this reflects the way that artificial intelligence has cut into what’s special about being human - but there is still that core left. I think a much better analogy would have been the god of the gaps - the idea that science has taken over lots of what was once attributed to deities, leaving just a collection of gaps.

At the heart of the book is an excellent point: how we as humans have great processing power in our brains but very limited bandwidth with which to communicate. By comparison, AIs have a huge amount of bandwidth to absorb vast amounts of data from the internet but can’t manage our use of understanding and context. This distinction is a crucial one and I’ve never seen it put better.

There are plenty of other nuggets of fascination. For example, from Lawrence’s time working at Amazon it’s interesting to hear how in the time it takes a customer’s web page to load, the system has to work out in the background where the customer is, what the stock is and where it’s located, from this calculating when to stop offering same day or next day delivery. Another random intriguing part is the rift that effectively killed off the predecessor of AI, cybernetics - Lawrence says its demise was caused by a lie that was a ‘fabrication designed to drive a wedge between Wiener (Mr Cybernetics) and McCulloch (cyberneticist turned AI engineer)’. Frustratingly, though, we are not told who told the lie or why they did so.

What gets in the way of this being a great book are its length and (lack of) structure. The content simply doesn’t justify such an endlessly long feeling book. But I could have coped with that if it wasn’t for the way it’s put together. To say it meanders is a huge understatement. It’s quite ironic that at one point Lawrence comments that at Facebook an ex-colleague discovered that ‘instead of a patchwork quilt you needed to weave a tapestry’. This is no tapestry.There’s a sort of greatness to the plethora of scattergun references repeatedly pulling back to central themes of AI vs human intelligence and the twin foci that Lawrence repeatedly visits of the end of the Second World War and his personal experience, particularly when working at Amazon. It is to a popular science book what a James Joyce novel is to a readable one. Some love Joyce… others don’t. I’m afraid I found it hugely irritating - the book cries out for some imposition of order.

One other small moan - you would think from reading this that Cambridge Analytics had been eminently successful in their ability to use post likes to predict psychometric measures. Yet David Sumpter’s Outnumbered tells us that it was a useless predictor of almost all measures, only likely to have succeeded to a degree with one. I have no reason to doubt Sumpter on this.

I am still giving the book four stars because when you get to those nuggets the content is important and interesting. We could have done with a bit more on the practical aspects of controlling AI - I take Lawrence’s point that the essential is preventing AI from being used to make life-changing decisions unchecked by humans (which probably includes not allowing it to drive cars), but it doesn't really suggest how we get practically from here to there. Even so, it’s an interesting book if you can cope with that near stream-of-consciousness storytelling.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
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

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more