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

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...