Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!RELAY.CS.NET!shen5%watdcsu.waterloo.edu From: shen5%watdcsu.waterloo.edu@RELAY.CS.NET ("B. Lindsay Patten") Newsgroups: mod.ai Subject: Re: AI and the Arms Race Message-ID: <8611181719.AA00510@watdcsu.uucp> Date: Tue, 18-Nov-86 12:19:58 EST Article-I.D.: watdcsu.8611181719.AA00510 Posted: Tue Nov 18 12:19:58 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 19-Nov-86 21:50:07 EST References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: "B. Lindsay Patten" Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 46 Keywords: weizenbaum arms race ethics Approved: ailist@sri-stripe.arpa Summary: Weizenbaum's basic message has been overlooked In article LIN@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU writes: >[I posted a message from AILIST on ARMS-D, and got back this reply.] >From: ihnp4!utzoo!henry at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU >Re: Professionals and Social Responsibility for the Arms Race [some valid objections to arguments made by Dr. Weizenbaum on problems with AI] >> 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... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> 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... > >I'm afraid this is muddy thinking again. *All* technology has military >applications. [examples of good things that came out of military research] >It's hard >to conceive of a field of research which doesn't have some kind of military >application. > > Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology > {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry This is by far the most common objection I've heard since Dr. Weizenbaum's lecture and one which I think avoids the point. Read the first three lines of point 8 above. The real point Dr. Weizenbaum was trying to make (in my opinion) was that we should weigh the good and bad applications of our work and decide which outweighs the other. The examples that he gave were just areas in which he personally believed the bad applications outweighed the good. He was very explicit that he was just presenting HIS personal opinions on the merits of these applications. Basically he said that if you feel your work will do more harm than good you should find another area to work in. My objection to his talk is that he seemed to want to weigh entire applications against one another. It seems to me that we should be examining the relative impact of our research in the applications which we approve of and in those we object to. Lindsay Patten |Cognitive Engineering Group (519) 746-1299| |Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence Lab lindsay@watsup| |University of Waterloo {decvax|ihnp4}!watmath!watvlsi!watsup!lindsay|