The AI Mirror - Shannon Vallor ****

Some titles tell you nothing about the book itself - but The AI Mirror puts Shannon Vallor's central argument front and centre: that artificial intelligence, particularly generative AI such as ChatGPT, is not intelligence at all, but rather holds a mirror up to our own intelligence. As Vallor points out, your reflection in a mirror certainly looks and acts like you - but it is not a person.

This is a metaphor that works impressively well. It reflects (get it?) the total lack of understanding in systems that are simply reflecting back data from a vast amount of human output. That's not to say that they have no value, but we always have to be aware of their nature and their abilities both to produce errors as a result and to reflect our in-built biases, which we may consciously suppress but nonetheless come through in the data. To quote Vallor, these systems 'aren't designed to be accurate, they are designed to sound accurate'.

What Vallor tells us we have that AI doesn't is 'practical wisdom' or prudence - you might doubt this if you listen to some politicians (say), but the point is that we are able to engage this kind of filter where the AI lacks the ability - and though there can be tinkering at the margins when AIs get things badly wrong, it won't stop them continuing to trip up.

As someone with a science background, I usually find reading philosophy books a real struggle, as they are rarely anything but clear - however Vallor puts forward her arguments in what is usually well-worded, comprehensible English. The only exception is a near-obsessive love of the painful word 'valorize' (I don't know if this is nominative determinism).

One very small moan - Vallor makes use of science fiction parallels and a couple of times refers to a SF source called iRobot - I think this is meant to be Isaac Asimov's I, Robot, not the vacuum cleaner manufacturer.

There is some powerful stuff here, though at one point Vallor notes how we're all becoming poor armchair non-experts in subjects like climate change, a subject she refers to consistently throughout the book despite it not being her subject. But there is one big issue: for me this is the classic 'article stretched to be a book'. The key points are excellent and thought-provoking, but they are all made at length and could have been condensed into far fewer words with more impact. I am, nonetheless giving the book four stars for its readability and central argument.

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

Comments

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically? Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...

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 ...

Search This Blog