Opinion: the Blockchain and artificial intelligence is two-edged swords
Olaf Groth Professor of International business school Hult. In his recent book “the Code of Solomon”, written in collaboration with an expert in the field of artificial intelligence mark Nisarga, Grotto thinking about how AI and the collection of data will change the life of mankind. The BREAKER website published an interview with a Professor in edited and abbreviated form.
BREAKER: You’re comparing artificial intelligence and open baccani, calling both of these phenomena are double-edged swords. Progress always has a price?
Olaf Groth: Most innovations have their pros and cons. Even a car can turn into a murder weapon. Even vaccine technology has a dark side: it causes the viruses begin to mutate faster. AI as bloccano can be abused, because it’s a Chinese puzzle to most people. Not be interested in the math, not to mention software coding. The effect of these technologies is not always obvious. Require more careful monitoring of this sphere.
BREAKER: the AI tends to strengthen social cohesion by bringing people together. Blockchain — at least in terms of rhetoric is a protest against the “midst a Facebook style” when you’re constantly sitting, his face buried in the monitor. Balance each other innovation?
Olaf Groth: the Real world is much more complicated. The blockchain has the potential to decentralize and anonymize the data, but these aspects are present risks. Thanks to AI and the blockchain we don’t know who, so to speak, behind the wheel. The blockchain can be used for activities that do not require the intervention of the state. The AI has the ability to influence at a distance: you can hide who does what.
The technology is developing clusters. The Internet has born together with mobile communications, online Commerce and technology videos, so now we have available a variety of web content. I think the blockchain and AI form another cluster, which also includes quantum computing, editing of the genome by modifying CRISPR (direct repeats of DNA), 3D printing and nanotechnology. All these phenomena — the pillars of the new cognitive era. We are increasingly becoming capable of changing the physical state of human beings and their environment.
We should reflect on how technology affects society in its different aspects. In Silicon valley used to think: “We have developed a new technology, it will revolutionize the industry, and you have a simple choice — for or against. It’s wonderful, while we are talking about a legacy industry structures. But in terms of impact of new technologies on the social structure is not so smooth. We must recognize the presence of feedback circuits. What happens when Russia begins to manipulate machine learning, and I see in news feed Facebook only specially selected news? We need enhanced “ethical censorship”. And need a practical solution, it is impossible to give these topics are relegated exclusively to philosophers.
BREAKER: your book describes a fantasy about how the AI finds the heroine a restaurant based on its current mood. If the definition of man is free will, it does not indicate whether similar to what you describe, the loss of human nature?
Olaf Groth: We should ensure that people always know how and why they take certain decisions. And if they don’t agree or want to know more, they should be able to click the button and get information. We need a button for failure. If not, we lose the freedom of choice that makes us human.
BREAKER: Random selection also represents value.
Olaf Groth: I Agree. If the decisions for me take the car and throughout life more and more with me lead, then the world can not by chance, by a happy coincidence, to influence me that it becomes a barrier to self-knowledge.
BREAKER: the first sentence of the first Chapter of your new book refers to how quickly people begin to consider innovation is the norm. How can you better respond to the risks of new technologies as their rapid development?
Olaf Groth: We are getting smarter. Before, we just worried about the fact that people harm themselves, too much time spending in Facebook. Now we truly understand: “Lord, why this phenomenon is changing the structure of society.” I think that with the growth of negative experience will increase awareness.
But in order to pre-empt risks, we need targeted working groups that will analyze the effect of certain algorithms. We don’t allow someone to just build the plane and say: “Welcome aboard, we will try to fly”. No, there is a Federal Agency of air transport, the engineers who certify aircraft and their technical components, and these people sign a non-disclosure of classified information. We need a similar model in which experts would conduct the audit code, pledging not to disclose this data. They will decide: “This code does not contain flaws, and there is an algorithm that addresses the deficiencies in the data; this good, and this is even better.”
BREAKER: How do you feel — the AI will simplify people’s interaction with the world or, on the contrary, complicate it?
Olaf Groth: Certain transactions it will facilitate. Computer, mobile phone, watch, car, house will understand my key preferences, and to facilitate some transactions. But I also think that the interaction of these algorithms will accelerate the process of change. Since so many realities become “smarter”, our environment is becoming more complex and the speed of what is happening in it is growing. We lose the ability to understand how the various parts of the system are connected and interact.
In the book “Code of Solomon” mark Nisarga write about how the Management of forward planning of defensive research works of the USA, develops AI systems, in order to better understand the nature of climate change and food crises and to prevent them or to lessen the effects.
Such systems can bring tremendous benefits to people all over the world. It is good for society and for humanity. But we’ve reached the point in development when even brilliant computer scientist does not understand how the machine thinks of all the what he thinks. We understand that the machines can work wonders, but are also aware that not all subjected to analysis and understand.
BREAKER: Supposedly certain kinds of people more will benefit from this change of habitat?
Olaf Groth: Win the class provided technologies and managing them. Win capital, as technology increases the need for capital and its value. Any gains for the working class — the question.
Do we risk if we don’t do some of the phenomena more democratic, whether it be pools of open data or open source. We are forced to watch as the class of technologists and intellectuals are becoming smarter and richer.
BREAKER: Head to successful technology projects, such as mark Zuckerberg, failed to foresee the consequences of the second order, that gave rise to their creation. How can you motivate such people to think in this direction?
Olaf Groth: Can you do this organically and artificially. You hope that Mr. Zuckerberg is smart and will learn from mistakes. This is a natural path of development. The unnatural way is when bringing the U.S. Congress and the European Parliament. They (officials) need assistants and consultants who enlighten them in matters of technology and taught the terminology. How recent American and European bureaucrats urged Zuckerberg to answer, disgusting.
BREAKER: Because they don’t know how to call him to account.
Olaf Groth: They don’t know what is the difference between application-level and intermediate. They can’t use their power until, until you understand how it applies to technology.
BREAKER: will users be Able in the future to abandon the technology?
Olaf Groth: General EU regulation on the protection of personal data, potentially creating a more equitable mode of operation and development of smart technologies. But even if it is not, when the market for 500 million man defends himself and says: “If you want to work here, you are obliged to follow the rules”, it sends large Internet companies signal about the need to be smarter. And increasingly harsh restrictions in China will cause harm to peers Google and Facebook all over the world, I think.
BREAKER: We touched on the dark side, but what are the obvious and great advantages of these technologies?
Olaf Groth: AI will help to understand the complex workings of the human body and to analyze the totality of the system. It will allow you to change the distribution model, routing and management to carry. To students and teachers it will help in training. In addition, it has huge potential applications in the fields of fight against crime and the distribution of products — thanks to AI can be eliminated from destructive political component.
But it’s a precarious balance, because we need a political discourse to form a certain Outlook, mentality, political will. If prematurely to stuff all smart cars, people lose the ability to think independently. This is another double-edged sword. However I see the potential for the comprehensive transformation of society, and this process will take 20— 25 years.