Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!BU-IT.BU.EDU!nat%drao.nrc.CDN%ean.ubc.ca
From: nat%drao.nrc.CDN%ean.ubc.ca@BU-IT.BU.EDU (Natalie Prowse)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: does AI kill?
Message-ID: <53*nat@drao.nrc.cdn>
Date: 19 Jul 88 23:03:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 54


It seems to me that all this discussion about whether or not humans are
kept 'in the loop' misses an important point: humans CREATED the 'loop'
in the first place.  The computer system didn't make the mistake, the
human designers did (in the AEGIS disaster).  But the more important
question is: Without the AEGIS system, would a human have made the
SAME mistake??  We can give AI systems more powerful senses than we
could ever have (ie 'radar'), and we can program in deductive reasoning,
but nothing is going to be perfect, because WE aren't perfect.  No human
has the capability for FLAWLESS decision making. (At least, none I'VE seen!)

All this discussion reminds me of a little ditty I read somewhere:

I really hate this damn machine,
I wish that they would sell it
It never does quite what I want,
but only what I tell it.

How can a person who is not capable of flawless decision making, design
a system that IS??  I have to admit, In some cases, I'd almost take
my chances with the computer system.  Granted, it can't feel compassion,
but by the same token, it can't feel malice or greed either.

Look at the situation in the courts.  In a recent program I watched on
our local 'KNOWLEDGE NETWORK' (sort of public TV), a discussion centered
on the fairness of the courts.  The EXACT SAME case was presented to a
variety of judges, (a burglary or something), and the sentences ranged
from 3 months probation to 5 years in jail.  I became very concerned after 
listening to the panel's discussion over the problems in the justice system, 
(and I'm sure it's as bad in the U.S.). Not that I'm into any criminal 
activities, but if I had to come up against a Judge, I think I'd rather 
take my chances  with a good AI system that metes out justice.  At least
there is no chance that the computer might have just had a fight with 
its spouse that morning, and is in a terrible mood when I come before it!!

We have to accept that anywhere we choose to let computers make
the decisions for us, they are in fact, making decisions in the
same way, (hopefully), than an EXPERT human would, and that is
by no means PERFECT.  At this point in time, computers are good
at straight DECISION MAKING.  We can't, as yet, program in emotions,
but then what is the point to that?  We have humans with emotions.
I think we have to decide where 'emotionless' decision making should best
be applied, and leave computers out of the other areas.  This is
perhaps where the ethics come into play.  Granted, a starwars-type system 
might accidentally shoot down an unidentified airbus, but what are
the chances that, in a totaly human controlled system, you don't get
some fanatic with  an apocalyptic view, who would push that button
to see some prophesy fulfilled? 


			-Natalie Prowse, D.R.A.O., Penticton, B.C.


P.S. - can someone tell me who wrote that little poem?, I can't remember 
       where I read it.