Skip to main content

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 the overriding first, which Dignum calls 'the AI paradox' - 'The more AI can do, the more it highlights the irreplaceable nature of human intelligence.' Because of potential misunderstandings of what AI is and what it can do, many of the paradoxes arise from the assumption that it can replace human intelligence, or indeed is intelligent at all in the same sense of humans. As Dignum points out, there is no doubt AI is better at some things than humans, just as a calculator is better at doing arithmetic. But because it is purely data driven and lacks any understanding or empathy (even it tries to fake it), it will never be a substitute for our abilities. Used properly it's a great asset, but we need to understand its limitations to use it well.

I won't go through all the other paradoxes here, but to give a flavour, we get the Agreement paradox 'The more we explore AI, the harder it becomes to agree on a definition', the beautifully paradoxical intelligence paradox 'AI is what AI cannot do' and the Regulation paradox (which I can't really see as a paradox at all) 'Responsible innovation need regulation'. For each paradox we get a chapter explaining why the paradox exists, what it means and in some cases (like regulation) why it's difficult to do anything about it.

A couple of small moans - Dignum refers to Ada King (Countess of Lovelace) as 'the world's first programmer' where in reality she was second as Babbage wrote several algorithms for the Analytical Engine (they weren't really programs in the modern sense) before her contribution. And the selection of examples of AI LLMs etc. was strangely limited - Anthropic got one mention of Claude (though not of the company), and X/Grok was not mentioned at all, which is odd given how often the latter gets picked up in the media when it hits problems.

The main weakness, apart from the writing style was that the book is far stronger on the issues than on solutions, which tend to be strongly oriented to relying on international bodies that seem incapable of much action. The two come together in the Solution paradox chapter where we get text like 'To move beyond AI-solutionism, a critical, multidisciplinary perspective is necessary... Aligning technological advances with democratic and human rights principles is crucial for ensuring just and equitable outcomes... A balanced approach, combining top-down and bottom-up strategies, is essential. Ethical frameworks must be adaptable to different cultural contexts, supporting a variety of interpretations and values.' A practical roadmap it isn't.

However, if you come to this book without great expectations for readability, it does provide genuine insights into the benefits and limitations of AI and how we need a better understanding of what it can do and how to use it safely and effectively, even if it can't sensibly get us from here to that desired position. As such it's valuable contribution to the AI debate.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...

Data Empire - Roopika Risam ****

The central thesis presented by Roopika Risam is that information gives us (and particularly countries) the power to organise, control and dominate others. Although I have a couple of issues with the presentation, this is a genuinely interesting trip through the history of our use of stored information from the earliest tallies to the latest information technology. I loved a quote from Lisa Gitelman that data is is always 'cooked' so 'raw data is an oxymoron'. This neatly underlines Risam's thesis that data and information are not neutral facts, but rather tools that (like everything from fire to electronics) can be used for good or evil. As we are taken through the historical context, it can sometimes be a little difficult to judge whether Risam regards a particular example as bad or good, even when the outcome is disastrous. One thing I didn't like too much is the adherence to a popular science writing approach that has got distinctly hackneyed: opening chapte...

Andrew Jaffe - Five way interview

Andrew Jaffe is professor of astrophysics and cosmology at Imperial College, London and director of the Imperial Centre for Inference and Cosmology. His new book is The Random Universe. Why science? I’ve always been interested in science, in particular in  astronomy, astrophysics, and space. One of my earliest memories - back in nursery school in New Jersey, I think - was watching one of the moon launches. I wanted that excitement to be part of my life! I never got to be an astronaut, but I did get to be part of the Planck Satellite team, and was privileged to be able to travel to the ESA Spaceport in French Guiana to watch the launch.  In between, I was lucky enough to have a supportive family, get a good education, and find inspiring teachers, mentors, and collaborators. They helped me model the universe, and helped me learn how to refine those models in the face of experimental and observational evidence. That is, they taught me to be a scientist. Why this book? The Random...