Much is said (and written) about how AI is used to analyze human behavior. Its role in producing data and teaching human behavior is often lost in the shadows. Today we'll look at one example of how AI is teaching behaviors rather than simply analyzing them and as a result stands poised to produce data on humans too.
A smarter Cortana, the Windows personal assistant, will be making her way to iOS and Android mobile devices, according to sources cited by the Reuters newswire.
The question is, why aren't more people analyzing the probable impact of AI on humankind and working on policies and plans to both maximize the benefits of AI and automation while minimizing the negative effects?
The top news stories for Oct. 13, 2014.
One cannot talk intelligently about big data and not be thinking of its ultimate outcome: artificial intelligence, or AI. BabyX is not a real baby but it shows us just how far AI has already come.
On this, the 100th anniversary of Turing's birth, researchers put a test before human judges to see if they could tell whether they were conversing with another human or a machine.
"One can imagine such technology outsmarting financial markets, out-inventing human researchers, out-manipulating human leaders, and developing weapons we cannot even understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all," wrote Stephen Hawking, Stuart Russell, Max Tegmark and Frank Wilczek in a post in The Independent.
Mashable has a good report on the use of WordSmith, an artificial intelligence system that uses data to churn out as many as five million stories a week--a feat human journalists and writers can't match. Is this the end of journalism as we know it? No, it isn't.
On GigaOm, Derrick Harris frames the advance of data analytics in terms of Geoffrey Moore's business classic Crossing the Chasm. Harris identifies five technologies that will help big data move into the mainstream.
Among the many things Harris said that I found fascinating is this gem: "Right now, the domain knowledge is in our heads--is it possible to extract just enough domain knowledge into software so that more people can more efficiently focus on the questions rather than the tools?" Here are more thoughts on that to mull over…