More AI Superpowers Self-Owns

I realize when you're writing about the bleeding edge of technology that in some cases, things are going to go wrong.

But boy, I really had to laugh when I read this in Kai-Fu Lee's "AI Superpowers":

Internet AI already likely has a strong grip on your eyeballs, if not your wallet. Ever find yourself going down an endless rabbit hole of YouTube videos? Do video streaming sites have an uncanny knack for recommending that next video that you've just got to check out before you get back to work? Does Amazon seem to know what you'll want to buy before you do?

If so, then you have been the beneficiary (or victim, depending on how you value your time, privacy, and money) of internet AI. This first wave began almost fifteen years ago but finally went mainstream around 2012. Internet AI is largely about using AI algorithms as recommendation engines: systems that learn our personal prefernces and then serve up content hand-picked for us.

Fair enough, except the algorithms now seem to favor (on Facebook) stuff that people have paid Facebook to promote and (on YouTube), inexplicably, videos I've already watched -- complete with the red bars on the thumbnails showing I have indeed watched them.

Then there's this, a few paragraphs later:

Adoping those same methods in a different context, a company like Cambridge Analytica used Facebook data  to better understand and target American voters during the 2015 presidential campaign.; Revealingly, it was Robert Mercer, founder of Cambridge Analytica, who reportedly conined the famous phrase, "There's no data like more data."

First, that really odd phrasing: a company "like" Cambridge Analytica. Why the "like"? Maybe he's trying to show that other companies outside of this one are mining data. Still, the phrasing is really weird.

And yes, it's *that* Cambridge Analytica.

Lee does go on to acknowledge the scandal, but in more of an "Oops, we got caught" way than anything else, which kind of ties in with the "What, me worry?" ethos Silicon Valley and China writ large seems to take in developing AI without really, you know, considering the ethics of it all.

He also mentions a few other uh-ohs:

Social media using internet AI to suss out "fake news," until, you know, they stopped doing that because purveyors of fake news wanted to pay them, and fake news got engagement, and money and engagement are a lot more important than, you know, stopping the spread of fake news.

AI helping teachers tailor their teaching to individual students, while the real AI concern in academia is students using generative AI to fake write everything from essays to discussion posts to journal posts so they can take the learning out of learning and get on to much more interesting things, like, I guess re-watching the videos the alrogithm tosses up for them to watch.

So much of this AI stuff is a race to the bottom. . .

In a way, of course, it's the bleeding edge thing that's biting the ideas put forth in this book. There's a lot good that can possibly come from AI, but what we're seeing mostly is that race to the bottom. I feel the same way about Clay Shirky's rosy look at the Internet in "Here Comes Everybody" and "Cognitive Surplus," where he sees the good the Internet offers. He'd have to write different books if he were to update those from the early 2000s.

Scammers are Dumb

Consider the many things wrong here:

1. Spelling errors.

2. Missing punctuation.

3. Spoofed email address that's a "no reply" from a company not associated with the one in question.

4. Sense of urgency.

5. "Inability" to withdraw during the process, meaning "We need time to steal your monnay so we're the ones imposing the inability."

6. (And this is from a nerdy English major perspective) Writing not done in parallel style.

And the biggest one of all:

7. I don't have a Coinbase account, zitbrains.

Way too Late at the Movies: The Life of Brian

For a very long time, this was the only thing I knew about The Life of Brian:

Such a perfect oddball moment - just the thing you *wouldn't* expect from the Monty Python crew, until you do.

The rest of the film? Eh.

The premise is fine. I didn't find it particularly blasphemous as many people have reported.

But I didn't need to see Graham Chapman's dong, sorry.

The film took an interesting premise -- one that's often misinterpreted as "What if someone else were mistaken as the Messiah -- and turns in a pretty lackluster movie, in my opinion. Fun set bits, but overall their sketch comedy is better. (The premise, I should mention: A bored dude gets caught up in an anti-Roman rebellion and comic hijinx ensue.)

Where Am I the One?

I continue reading Kai-Fu Lee's AI Superpowers, and continue to find questionable things.

Today's reading included this bit about Enrico Fermi:

Fermi and the Manhattan Project embodied an age of discovery that rewarded quality over quantity in expertise. In nuclear physics, the 1930s and 1940s were an age of fundamental breakthroughs, and when it came to making those breakthroughs, one Enrico Fermi was worth thousands of less brilliant physicists. American leadership in this era was built in large part on attracting geniuses like Fermi: men and women who could singlehandedly tip the scales of scientific power.

At this point, a former reader of this book, who has scrawled copious notes in the margins, poses this question to himself:

My answer to him is the same answer I'd give myself: Probably nowhere, dude. Because the idea of the lone genius is just that, an idea that doesn't really exist.

Particularly on the part of Enrico Fermi.

The following is from an article by David Schwartz:

His student and colleague from his days in Rome, Edoardo Amaldi, described it this way: “I would say that his ability to drag others into work, with great intensity, for many hours, was one of his characteristics. He did it with us in Rome, then he went to Columbia University in New York and created a new group in Columbia; he went to Chicago and created another group for the simple reason that his role was that of general counsel; back in Chicago he created yet another group. Wherever he went he had this great influence on the people around him.”

Later on in the same article, this:

Fermi started collaborating early in life. As a child, he began to develop a passion for science working alongside his brother Giulio, who died unexpectedly when Enrico was just 13 years old. Together they pursued boyhood enthusiasms like making model airplanes and building electric motors. After Giulio’s tragic death, Enrico turned to his friend, Enrico Persico, and continued his exploration of the scientific world.

Fermi may have been the one to have ideas come together, but it was through long exploration which involved flashes of insight amid a lot of cooperation and collaboration.

The idea of the lone genius is something that Silicon Valley loves, and it seems to have infected other silicon areas worldwide. I'm confident that even in places where we suspect there was a lone genius at work, there were others there behind the curtains helping, many in significant ways. The lone genius makes for good storytelling and marketing, but is a lie.

The Highlight of My Day

The highlight of my day?

I bought two casters to replace casters I didn't know we had on a couch because one of the old casters broke when we moved the couch so why not replace both so the other one doesn't break soon afterward?

I guess I did get to go with Lexie, who also went to Sam's Club and Walmart with me, in addition to Lowes. She's good company.

But that was the highlight of my day.

Oh, we also put rubber coasters under the casters and legs so they don't dig into the carpet as deeply now. Wild stuff.

Beat out being told I was "impatient" when I asked a follow-up question of my boss at work today. It was a simple question, but it was an affront to ask it, I guess. The older I get, the less I understand people. And the less I want to understand people.

So I did other things, lest I bebother others.

I'm wondering, can I put in for a transfer to the Russian Front? Or at least a transer back to the RWMC come July when work from home ends and I might be in more pleasant company? Or, maybe that job I applied for at ATR will come through this time.

I wonder a lot of things, sitting here in the basement, being impatient apparently.

Lady, Where's My Spy Camera?

I'm trying to pay attention to the little words in these big books I read.

One word I'm seeing a lot of in Kai-Fu Lee's "AI Superpowers, China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order," is data. As in calling China the "Saudi Arabia of data."

Dig this:

But this Chinese commitment to grunt work is also what is laying the groundwork for Chinese leadership in the age of AI implementation. By immersing themselves in the messy details of food delivery, car repairs, shared bikes, and purchases at the corner store, these companies are turning China into the Saudi Arabia of data: a country that suddenly finds itself sitting atop stockpiles of the key resource that powers this technological era. China has already vaulted far ahead of the United States as the world's largest producer of digital data, a gap that's widening by the day.

What kind of data is being gathered? He continues:

Silicon Valley juggernauts are amassing data from your activity on their platforms, but the data concentrates heavily in your online behavior, such as searched made, photos uploaded, YouTube videos watched, and post "liked." Chinese companies are instead gathering data from the real world: the what, when, and where of physical purchases, meals, makeovers, and transportation. Deep learning can only optimize what it can "see" by way of data, and China's physically grounded technology ecosystem gives these algorithms many more eyes into the content of our daily lives. As AI begins to "electrify" new industries, China's embrace of the messy details of the real world will give it an edge on Silicon Valley.

In other words, mass surveillance of life aspects both online and offline -- severe invasions of privacy -- will become the future driver as China and Silicon Valley race to the ethical bottom of this AI-influenced competition.

We see this already in the United States. Amazon offers a $10 premium a month to users who'll share receipts of non-Amazon purchases with them. We do this, for the money, so we are part of the problem. We don't quite have the level of China's mysterious "social credit" system, but the foundations are being laid. More data is being gathered on us than we probably want to believe.

And we're supposed to cheer for this, according to Lee. Or, at least Silicon Valley is supposed to be shaking in their boots that they're not collecting enough of this kind of crap.

I'm sure AI will find ways to do magnificent things, from detecting breast cancer earlier and such. But a lot of what I'm seeing is "Hey, use our AI to write or create art, so you can get back to the drudgery of your everyday life and hope some other poor sucker out there buys your AI "creations" so you can make a fast buck. That's not what I want for my future.

Become the Saudia Arabia of data all you want. And continue the metaphor by seeing your data contribute to global warming, snarled traffic, microplastics in the Mariana Trench, and the other pollutants your oil-based metaphor would have us believe. Remember, not everything that came from oil was good for the Earth, and the same will be said of AI.

"That's Crazy Talk"

Lately, this is all I see on social media:

And it doesn't matter where. Or who's posting. It's everywhere, and practically everyone. Even, sometimes, me.

What was the trigger, or at least what got me thinking about this tonight?

I saw a post about the closure of an asbestos clinic in Libby, Montana.

I didn't really know why the clinic had closed. And, clearly, not many of the posters on the thread knew either. Many assumed it was Trump/DOGE cuts. And, initially, that's what I thought.

Then a poster got on and in a rather unhinged fashion pointed out the clinic had closed because it lost a court case in which it was accused of approving benefits for people who weren't sick -- clearly committing fraud.

The poster who brought this up was unhinged in her response, and equally unhinged as she responded to a fellow who challenged her response. I don't know if he knew the reason for the closure, but it didn't appear to be.

Both of them went on to shout past each other, not acknolwedging the truths being spoken by the other -- industry had certainly hurt this town and those who were sick because of it deserved compensation; but it appeared at least $3 million of that compensation was awarded fraudulently.

Neither one seemed willing to see the others' point.

I was going to jump in, but decided to check facts first. And yes, the court case is true. But neither the person who brought it up or the person who was questioning the closure could see the facts and come to any kind of agreement. That the poster who brought the court case up was shouting conservative dogwhistles all the while didn't help her case, and it appeared those commenting couldn't see past the dogwhistles long enough to consider the truth.

It all makes me want to engage less on social media. Or at least make sure I know what the hell I'm talking about before I post a single word.

More often than not, what Marge says to Kent Brockman on Smartline is pretty apt:

Pity the Petunias

We have flowers at the Davidson home, particularly petunias and alyssum.

We generally have black thumbs. We'll see how they do. But as for now, they appear to be happy.

More to plant -- including tomatoes -- in the next few days. Once I finish getting the garden cleaned out.

BLOCKED

Update to this story of randos calling me about cars.

I did end up calling the dealership. Twice. On two phone numbers.

No response, of course. Which is what I expected. They're not communicating with their customer, so they have no real reason to communicate with me as well.

But because I don't want to be in the middle of this anymore, I did the only thing within my power: I blocked the number of the lady who kept calling. I feel bad for her, but there's no reason for me to be dragged into the drama she's having.

And I don't want to be pulled any further into a possible scam. It's beyond weird.

My guesses:

1. She copied the number down wrong and should in fact be calling someone else.

2. The dealership gave her the wrong number.

3. The dealership is a bunch of shysters who gave her a random number in an attempt to get her off their backs.

I don't want to be involved in this. So I'm not.

Map of DOOM

The Irish Sun newspaper -- and you have to love anything associated with The Sun because they always bring sensationally fun times -- provided readers/viewers with a map of the parts of the Earth where the Russian Kosmos 482 spacecraft, originally destined for Venus, has a chance to crash.

The map:

I mean, it is accurate. The map does show the surface of the Earth over which the ailing piece of space junk does orbit. So they're not wrong. The lack of precision, of course, is the fun part.

Other sites have a bit more accuracy going for them, such as this one.

They offer some interesting suggested paths; with the third one (bottom) passing pretty much over my city on the 12th, if that's the day it comes down. (Other lines are, top, May 10; middle, May 11). The predicted day is the 10th.

This one, curiously, suggests the probe's parachutes may have deployed in space. Neat.