Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!clyde!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!brewster From: brewster@watdcsu.UUCP (dave brewer, SD Eng, PAMI ) Newsgroups: net.ai,net.cog-eng,sci.physics,sci.math Subject: Weizenbaum keynote address at U of Waterloo (long) Message-ID: <2689@watdcsu.UUCP> Date: Sat, 1-Nov-86 23:04:36 EST Article-I.D.: watdcsu.2689 Posted: Sat Nov 1 23:04:36 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 3-Nov-86 23:54:44 EST Distribution: net Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 112 Xref: mnetor net.ai:1269 net.cog-eng:322 sci.physics:100 sci.math:108 The Hagey Lectures at the University of Waterloo provide an opportunity for a distinguished researcher to address the community at large every year. This year, Dr. Weizenbaum of MIT was the chosen speaker, and he has just delivered two key note addresses entitled; "Prospects for AI" and "The Arms Race, Without Us". The important points of the first talk can be summarized as : 1) AI has good prospects from an investment prospective since a strong commitment to marketing something called AI has been made. 2) the early researchers did not understand how difficult the problems they addressed were and so the early claims of the possibilities were greatly exaggerated. The trend still continues but on a reduced scale. 3) AI has been a handle for some portion of the US military to hang SDI on, since whenever a "difficult" problem arises it is always possible to say , " Well, we don't understand that now, but we can use AI techniques to solve that problem later." 4) the actual achievements of AI are small. 5) the ability of expert systems to continuously monitor stock values and react has led to increased volatility and crisis situations in the stock markets of the world recently. What happens if machine induced technical trading drops the stock market by 20 % in one day , 50 % in one day ? The important points of the second talk can be summarized as : 1) not all problems can be reduced to computation, for example how could you conceive of coding the human emotion loneliness. 2) AI will never duplicate or replace human intelligence since every organism is a function of its history. 3) research can be divided into performance mode or theory mode research. An increasing percentage of research is now conducted in performance mode, despite possible desires to do theory mode research, since funds (mainly military), are available for performance mode research. 4) research on "mass murder machines" is possible because the researchers (he addressed computer scientists directly although extension to any technical or scientific discipline was implied), are able to psychologically distance themselves from the end use of their work. 5) technical education that neglects language, culture, and history, may need to be rethought. 6) courage is infectious, and while it may not seem to be a possibility to some, the arms race could be stopped cold if an entire group of professions, (ie computer scientists), refused to participate. 7) the search for funds has led to an increased rate of performance mode research, and has even induced many institutions to prostitute themselves to the highest bidder. Specific situations within MIT were used for examples. Weizenbaum had the graciousness to ignore related (albeit proportionally smaller), circumstances at this university. 8) every researcher should assess the possible end use of their own research, and if they are not morally comfortable with this end use, they should stop their research. Weizenbaum did not believe that this would be the end of all research, but if that was the case then he would except this result. He specifically referred to research in machine vision, which he felt would be used directly and immediately by the military for improving their killing machines. While not saying so, he implied that this line of AI should be stopped dead in its tracks. Posters comments : 1) Weizenbaum seemed to be technically out of date in some areas, and admitted as much at one point. Some of his opinions regarding state of the art were suspect. 2) His background, technical and otherwise, seems to predispose him to dismissing some technical issues a priori. i.e. a machine can never duplicate a human, why ?, because !. 3) His most telling point, and one often ignored, is that researchers have to be responsible for their work, and should consider its possible end uses. 4) He did not appear to have thought through all the consequences of a sudden end to research, and indeed many of his solutions appear overly simplistic, in light of the complicated world we live in. 5) You have never seen an audience squirm, as they did for the second lecture. A once premier researcher, addresses his contemporaries, and tells them they are ethically and morally bankrupt, and every member of the audience has at least some small buried doubt that maybe he is right. 6) Weizenbaum intended the talks to be "controversial and provocative" and has achieved his goal within the U of W community. While not agreeing with many of his points, I believe that there are issues raised which are relevant to the entire world-wide scientific community, and have posted for this reason. The main question that I see arising from the talks is : is it time to consider banning, halting, slowing, or otherwise rethinking certain AI or technical adventures, such as machine vision, as was done in the area of recombinant DNA. Disclaimer : The opinions above are mine and may not accurately reflect those of U of Waterloo, Dr.Weizenbaum, or anyone else for that matter. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the above summarization and advise that transcripts of the talks are available from some place within U of W, but expect to pay for them because thats the recent trend. UUCP : {decvax|ihnp4}!watmath!watdcsu!brewster Else : Dave Brewer, (519) 886-6657