This is the sixth chapter in a series of pieces about our modern relationship with time and the future. Titled Hourglass, It’s an exploration into how our abstract view of time has changed in modernity, how it has met (or has yet to meet) the needs of the present, and what we can do to better prepare ourselves for what’s to come.
这是关于我们与时间和未来的现代关系的系列文章中的第六章。 标题为“ 沙漏” ，它探索了我们对时间的抽象看法如何在现代性中发生了变化，如何满足(或尚未满足)当前的需求，以及我们可以做些什么来更好地为即将发生的事情做好准备。
First Chapter / Previous Chapter / Next Chapter
If the human brain were so simpleThat we could understand it,We would be so simpleThat we couldn’t.
如果人类的大脑如此简单以至于我们可以理解，那么我们将会如此简单以至于我们无法。
— Emerson M. Pugh
—艾默生·普格
Inside that head of yours is something magnificent. A processing unit so complex, so mysterious, that even those who have dedicated decades to its study have barely scratched the surface. An organ so dynamic and interconnected, some have called it the most complex system in the known universe. I’m talking, of course, about the human brain.
在您的脑海中，宏伟的事物。 一个处理单元如此复杂，如此神秘，以至于那些专门研究它数十年的人都几乎没有触及表面。 一个如此动态和相互联系的器官，有人称它为已知宇宙中最复杂的系统。 我说的当然是人的大脑。
The study of the brain, and that which it confers onto humankind — the gifts of intelligence and consciousness, have captured the human imagination since times of old. In some sense, replicating this process in an external setting has been a deep-rooted goal of humankind for a long time. A mind made from a machine, not from flesh. Before modernism, romanticism, before all the isms that have come to define our modern age, there was the will to understand who we are, and what mad force of the universe compelled it to create, within itself, a small and insignificant being capable of observing it. Some sought the stars for answers, others sailed across the world. But it wasn’t until we started looking inward that we finally uncovered the intricacies of the mind.
对大脑及其赋予人类的研究-智力和意识的天赋，自古以来就已经捕获了人类的想象力。 从某种意义上说，在外部环境中复制此过程是人类长期以来根深蒂固的目标。 用机器而不是用肉造的头脑。 现代主义，浪漫主义之前，一切都来定义我们现代的主义之前，有意愿来了解我们是谁，什么宇宙的狂力迫使它来创建，在其内部，一个渺小和微不足道的存在能观察它。 一些人向星星寻求答案，另一些人环游世界。 但是直到我们开始向内看时，我们才终于发现了内心的错综复杂。
狡猾的头脑 (An Artful Mind)
If you’ve ever seen the pages of Leonardo Da Vinci’s sketchbooks, you’ll realize that the illustrations before you are well-ahead of their time. Mechanical machines, anatomical studies, and drawings of flora and fauna explode out of the pages, a sublime marriage of art and science. It is here where you will find sketches of the mind that are nothing short of extraordinary.
如果您看过达芬奇 ( Leonardo Da Vinci)的速写本的页面，您将意识到插图早已成为时代。 机械机器，解剖学研究以及动植物的图画从书页中爆炸出来，这是艺术与科学的崇高结合。 在这里，您会发现心智的草图，非凡。
In 1487, Leonardo drew what he called the senso comune (literally, common sense), the linkage of the senses. His early sketches hypothesized how visual information was transferred to the brain via the optic nerves² ³ and how sensory input would be conveyed, via the spinal cord, to the muscles of the body⁴. By 1509, Leonardo used his knowledge in sculpting and molding to map out the structure of cerebral ventricles, the hollow cavities in the human brain⁴. His work in understanding anatomy had led him to some of the greatest breakthroughs in the inner workings of the mind at the time. Sadly, his work did little to influence neuroscience, as he rarely published any of his work³ ⁴. It would not be until over four centuries later that Walter E. Dandy would develop similar techniques for mapping the brain⁵.
1487年，莱昂纳多(Leonardo)绘制了他所谓的senso comune (字面意义上的常识 )，即感觉的联系。 他的早期素描假设了视觉信息如何通过视神经传递到大脑，以及如何通过脊髓将感觉输入传递到身体的肌肉。 到1509年，莱昂纳多将自己的知识用于雕刻和模制，以绘制出脑室的结构，即人脑中的空心空腔。 他在理解解剖学方面的工作使他在当时的心灵内部运作方面取得了一些重大突破。 可悲的是，他的工作几乎没有影响神经科学，因为他很少发表任何著作。 直到四个多世纪后 ，沃尔特·丹迪(Walter E. Dandy)才开发出类似的技术来绘制大脑图。
In 1887, another artist-scientist would make a significant discovery on the inner workings of the mind. Using a silver-staining technique (“Golgi staining”), Santiago Ramon y Cajal was able to isolate brain cells for the first time. The staining technique allowed Cajal to view a small subset of the cells at a time, turning what used to be a convoluted mess of grey matter into a clear, pristine look into the underlying neural circuitry. Take one look at the sketches he made from his discovery and you’ll once again see the interconnected nature of science and art. It’s almost like looking at an old, hand-drawn map: each neuron is drawn with exquisite detail, its dendrites, axon, and cell body clearly outlined in an interconnected network⁶.
1887年，另一位艺术家-科学家对大脑的内部运作方式进行了重大发现。 圣地亚哥·拉蒙·卡哈尔(Santiago Ramon y Cajal)使用银染技术(“高尔基染色”)首次分离出脑细胞。 染色技术使Cajal一次可以查看一小部分细胞，将过去是一团混乱的灰质变成清晰清晰的原始神经回路。 看看他从他的发现中所作的草图，您将再次看到科学与艺术的内在联系。 几乎就像看着一张旧的手绘图：每个神经元都绘制有精致的细节，其树突，轴突和细胞体清晰地在互连的网络中勾勒出轮廓⁶。
His work, rendered beautifully on paper by his own artistic talent, demonstrated a number of things: first, that the brain’s computing power rose from a vast array of diverse and differentiated neurons, and second, that they operated in a network-like fashion — propagating information from one end of the cell to the next, onward and outward in spindly fibers to other neurons⁷.
他的作品是由他自己的艺术才华在纸上精美呈现的，它展示了许多东西：首先，大脑的计算能力来自大量多样和分化的神经元，其次，它们以类似于网络的方式运作-将信息从细胞的一端传播到另一端，并在刺纤维中向前和向外传播到其他神经元。
Later contributions would compound evidence for this “network” style correspondence in the brain, particularly in the visual cortex, the region responsible for making sense of visual information. The visual cortex consists of many distinct layers of neurons, that propagate information deeper and deeper into the network, much like sports fans doing “the wave” in an arena. Information is passed from V1 to V2 to V4⁸, and later to the inferotemporal cortex, where images are integrated and processed⁹. The question, however, remained — how might we, as humans, model these intricate neural networks?
以后的贡献将为这种“网络”样式在大脑中的对应关系提供证据，尤其是在视觉皮层(负责理解视觉信息的区域)中。 视觉皮层由许多不同的神经元层组成，它们将信息越来越深地传播到网络中，就像体育迷在竞技场中进行“波浪”一样。 信息从V1传递到V2，再传递到V4，然后传递到颞下皮质，在此整合并处理图像。 然而，问题仍然存在：作为人类，我们如何建模这些复杂的神经网络？
心灵与机器 (The Mind and the Machine)
The modern computer has come a long way since the mid-twentieth century, when large, monstrous behemoths with switches and dials were used to calculate missile trajectories and send people into space. What used to be stacks and stacks of metal shelves and tubing can now fit neatly in the palm of your hand. Modern digital computers use algorithms, a set of step-by-step rules, to make calculations. These calculations take inputs, such as a tap on your screen or a number, and translate them into outputs, like a Facebook post or a bank account statement. These calculations may seem simple individually, but they can get ever-more complex as more layers are added to existing modules. Take Google for example — it consists of an extensive list of search results, a massive infrastructure required to connect and rank those results, and a distributed way to deal with multiple requests at once, just to name a few functions. With such complex systems, it might even be possible to attribute some level of intelligence to them — not biological, of course, but artificial.
自二十世纪中叶以来，现代计算机已经走了很长一段路。当时，带有开关和转盘的大型庞然大物被用来计算导弹的轨迹并将人们送入太空。 过去是一堆又一堆的金属架子和油管，现在可以整齐地放在您的手掌中。 现代数字计算机使用算法 (一组分步规则)进行计算。 这些计算采用输入，例如屏幕上的点击或数字，然后将它们转换为输出，例如Facebook帖子或银行对帐单。 这些计算可能看起来很简单，但是随着向现有模块中添加更多层，它们会变得越来越复杂。 以Google为例-它包含大量搜索结果，连接和排名这些结果所需的庞大基础结构以及一次处理多个请求(仅举几个功能)的分布式方法。 使用如此复杂的系统，甚至有可能将某种程度的智能归因于它们-当然不是生物学的，而是人工的。
One modern development in artificial intelligence is known as machine learning. The basic idea behind machine learning is that we (humans) can write algorithms (code) that learn to adapt better and better every time. Suppose I give you a very rudimentary game, like Tic-Tac-Toe. If I play a game once, I can have the computer store it in memory. If it wins and I play the game again in the same fashion, it will play its old strategy. If it loses, or if I play a different strategy, it’ll try to change things up — and once that new game is done, it’ll store it in memory again. This is a very rudimentary example of adaptive learning, and it’s pretty clear to see that it won’t get you very far. For a game of Tic-Tac-Toe, we might make some headway, but we aren’t going to drive cars with this thing anytime soon. To do that, we’re going to need to try something a bit more complex.
人工智能的一种现代发展被称为机器学习 。 机器学习背后的基本思想是，我们(人类)可以编写算法(代码)，每次学习都越来越适应。 假设我给你一个非常基本的游戏，例如井字游戏。 如果我玩过一次游戏，则可以将计算机存储在内存中。 如果获胜，而我以相同的方式再次玩游戏，它将发挥其原有的策略。 如果失败了，或者我采取了不同的策略，它将尝试改变一切—一旦完成新游戏，它将再次将其存储在内存中。 这是适应性学习的一个非常基本的例子，很显然，它不会使您走得太远。 对于井字游戏，我们可能会取得一些进展，但我们不会在不久的将来使用这种东西驾驶汽车。 为此，我们将需要尝试一些更复杂的事情。
Many modern machine learning algorithms use a learning method called gradient descent¹⁰. It sounds fancy, but it really isn’t. Here’s how it works. Imagine you’re tuning an instrument; a guitar, for example. You pluck one string, and it sounds a little bit off. So you turn a knob a little bit, and it sounds worse. No good. So you turn the knob in the other direction, and it sounds better. Great. So you turn it ever so slightly in the same direction, plucking as you go, until you get the string to play the right key. Do that for all the strings and you’ve got an instrument that is completely in-tune. What you’ve done there is a manual version of gradient descent. You’ve got an objective function — something that defines what you’re trying to do. In this case, it might be a tuning fork or an iPhone tuning app. And every time you “sample” the input by plucking a key, you know what direction you should turn it in, based on whether your objective function tells you you’re getting closer or farther away. Do this for multiple strings, all at once, and you’ve got a system of learning modules that get progressively better over time.
许多现代的机器学习算法都使用一种称为梯度下降的学习方法。 听起来很花哨，但实际上并非如此。 运作方式如下。 想象一下您正在调整乐器； 例如吉他。 您拨了一根弦，听起来有些不对劲。 因此，您稍微旋转一下旋钮，听起来会更糟。 不好。 因此，您将旋钮朝另一个方向旋转，听起来会更好。 大。 因此，您可以沿着相同的方向稍微转动一下，然后随即弹起，直到获得弹奏正确琴键的弦。 对所有琴弦进行此操作，您将拥有一个完全调音的乐器。 您所做的是手动版本的梯度下降。 您有一个目标函数-定义您要执行的操作的函数 。 在这种情况下，它可能是音叉或iPhone音调应用程序。 每次您通过按下一个键对输入进行“采样”时，您就会根据目标函数是否告诉您越来越近而知道应该向哪个方向旋转。 一次对多个字符串执行此操作，您将获得一个学习模块系统，该模块会随着时间的推移逐渐变得更好。
Inspired by the architecture of the brain, computer scientists realized that they could stack these computational modules on top of one another, mimicking brain behavior. Suddenly, you’ve got an algorithm — several “layers” deep — that can model all sorts of different cool functions — from images of cats to whale sounds to stock market prices. This is the essence of most modern-day machine learning algorithms, and the basis of neural networks (so-called “deep learning”). These represent some of the most powerful computational tools we have in our wheelhouse today, and we’re just barely scratching the surface of what’s possible. So — the million dollar question is — what is possible? Let’s find out, shall we?
受大脑结构的启发，计算机科学家意识到，他们可以将这些计算模块相互堆叠，从而模仿大脑行为。 突然之间，您就有了一种算法-多层的“层次”-可以对各种不同的炫酷功能进行建模-从猫的图像到鲸鱼的声音再到股市价格。 这是大多数现代机器学习算法的本质，也是神经网络(所谓的“深度学习”)的基础。 这些代表了当今驾驶室中一些最强大的计算工具，而我们只是勉强了解可能的一切。 那么-百万美元的问题是-可能吗？ 让我们找出答案，对吧？
重新定义不可能 (Redefining Impossible)
What’s so special about us? What’s one task that is so hard, it would be difficult — no, impossible — for another animal or machine to beat us at it? For a long time, the answer to this was chess. In the 1980s, the notion that a computer could win a chess match against a human was a laughable notion. But in February 1996, the DeepBlue algorithm defeated Gary Kasparov, the reigning world chess champion, at his own game¹¹. Okay, fine. So computers could beat us at chess. No big deal, it was’t that interesting anyway. Why not try your hand at Go, a game so complex that the number of possible moves exceeded the number of atoms in the universe. Surely, surely, this was a uniquely human task. In 2015, Google DeepMind unveiled AlphaGo, a bot trained by neural networks to play the game. It won 5–0 against reigning three-time European Champion, Fan Hui¹². And that was just the beginning.
我们有什么特别之处？ 一项如此艰巨的任务是，另一种动物或机器要击败我们，将是困难的(不，不可能)？ 长期以来，答案就是国际象棋。 在1980年代，计算机可以赢得人类的国际象棋比赛的想法是一个可笑的想法。 但是在1996年2月，DeepBlue算法在自己的游戏中击败了卫冕世界象棋冠军加里·卡斯帕罗夫(Gary Kasparov)。 好的，很好 。 因此计算机可以在国际象棋上击败我们。 没什么大不了的，反正不是那么有趣。 为什么不去尝试一下Go(Go)呢？这款游戏是如此复杂，以至于可能的移动次数超过了宇宙中原子的数目。 当然，这肯定是一项独特的人工任务。 2015年，Google DeepMind推出了AlphaGo，这是一款由神经网络训练后可以玩游戏的机器人。 它以5比0击败三届欧洲冠军范晖12。 那仅仅是开始。
In late 2017, we introduced AlphaZero, a single system that taught itself from scratch how to master the games of chess, shogi, and Go, beating a world-champion program in each case.
在2017年末，我们推出了AlphaZero，这是一个单一系统，从头开始教自己如何掌握国际象棋，将棋和围棋游戏，在每种情况下都击败了一项世界冠军计划。
— Google DeepMind, on AlphaZero [12]
— Google DeepMind，在AlphaZero上[12]
The past decade has resulted in a veritable Cambrian Explosion of neural network architectures, each specializing in different domains. By pitting neural networks against each other in a rivalrous fashion, you get Generative Adversarial Networks¹³, capable of rendering faces so real that a dedicated website has been made for entirely artificially generated photos of people who don’t exist. These networks can turn photos into artwork¹⁴, paint-by-numbers¹⁵, and fabricate images of celebrities and world leaders (so-called DeepFakes)¹⁶. Other “species” of network specialize in processing language and language-like variants. By using selective “attention”, these networks, called Transformers, are capable of generating text so similar to human writing that the developers opted to withhold releasing the source code to the public¹⁷. Other transformer variants are capable of generating music that mimics the style of other composers¹⁸. The list goes on and on — bots that can detect heart disease, play videogames, drive cars. These are not musings of a futurist — these are things happening right now, as we speak. We’d do well to tread carefully on the next thing we deem “impossible”, because based on our track record, there’s a good chance we’d be wrong.
在过去的十年中，神经网络架构引起了名副其实的寒武纪爆炸式增长，每个领域都专门研究不同的领域。 通过以竞争的方式使神经网络相互竞争，您将获得Generative Adversarial Networks 13，它能够真实地渲染人脸，因此专门制作了一个网站 ， 专门为不存在的人提供完全人工生成的照片 。 这些网络可以将照片变成艺术品，按数字绘画，并制作名人和世界领导人的图像(所谓的DeepFakes)。 网络的其他“种类”专门处理语言和类似语言的变体。 通过使用选择性的“注意力”，这些称为“变形金刚”的网络能够生成与人类文字非常相似的文本，以至于开发人员选择不向公众公开源代码。 其他变形金刚能够产生模仿其他作曲家风格的音乐。 这个清单不胜枚举-可以检测心脏病，玩视频游戏，驾驶汽车的机器人。 这些不是未来主义者的沉思-正如我们所说的，这些正在发生。 我们最好谨慎对待下一个我们认为“不可能”的事情，因为根据我们的往绩记录，很可能我们会错。
Contrary to the hypotheses of most science fiction writers (and, sadly, many pop-science journalists), the risk we run with artificial intelligence isn’t likely to come from generalized intelligence anytime soon. That is to say, it’s unlikely that computers will develop to the point where they are conscious, intelligent, and outperform humans at virtually every task. The fear of AI overlords isn’t totally out of the realm of possibilities, but it’s a slim one, at least for now. That’s the good news. There isn’t going to be a robot that can be you better than you can be you, at least for now. The bad news is that it doesn’t have to be.
与大多数科幻小说家(以及可悲的是，许多流行科学记者)的假设相反，我们使用人工智能运行的风险不太可能很快来自广义智能 。 就是说，计算机几乎不可能发展到在几乎每项任务上有意识，聪明并胜过人类的程度。 对AI霸主的恐惧并没有完全超出可能性范围，但至少在目前，这是一个渺茫的挑战。 那是个好消息。 至少到目前为止，不会有一个机器人能比你做的更好。 坏消息是它不一定必须如此。
Already, humans are finding that machine learning models and AI agents are capable of outperforming themselves at a wide variety of tasks. This isn’t a problem in principle; technology of the past has typically enabled the creation of new jobs, new opportunities, and new ways of life. We’ve seen how the invention of the train and the telegraph led to massive improvements in science and innovation, leading to a massive boom in industry growth from the Industrial Revolution. Old industries die, and new industries emerge, like phoenixes from the Schumpeterian flame (if you got that reference, we can be friends). So the story goes. Unfortunately, the scale and pace at which these industries may be replaced may far outmatch our ability to relocate workers to new positions. In simple terms, not every truck driver can become a computer scientist in a few years. And it’s not just truck drivers. Clerks, deliverymen, sales representatives, and even lawyers might go out the window in a few decades¹⁹. The thing is, AI doesn’t have to be better at you at everything, it just has to be better than you at one thing. That one thing? Your job.
人们已经发现，机器学习模型和AI代理能够在各种任务上胜过自己。 原则上这不是问题； 过去的技术通常能够创造新的工作，新的机会和新的生活方式。 我们已经看到了火车和电报的发明如何导致科学和创新的巨大进步，并导致了工业革命带来的行业增长的巨大繁荣。 老工业死了，新工业出现了，就像熊彼特式火焰中的凤凰(如果您有这个参考，我们可以成为朋友)。 故事就这样了。 不幸的是，这些行业可能被替换的规模和步伐可能远远超过我们将工人重新安置到新职位的能力。 简单来说，几年内并不是每个卡车司机都能成为计算机科学家。 不只是卡车司机。 文员，送货员，销售代表，甚至律师都可能在几十年后消失。 问题是，AI不必在所有方面都超越您，而在某件事上必须要比您更好。 那一件事？ 你的工作。
It’s important to note that (as of 2020), artificial intelligence doesn’t have any markedly sinister intent. Machine learning models don’t want to take over your job, nor do the engineers coding them want to replace you. But it doesn’t really matter, now does it? That’s effectively the same thing as saying “it’s nothing personal”, as you send an employee out the door. So what do we do about it?
重要的是要注意(截至2020年)，人工智能没有任何明显的险恶意图。 机器学习模型不想接管您的工作，编码的工程师也不希望取代您。 但这并不重要，现在呢？ 实际上，当您派遣员工出门时，这与说“没什么私人的”实际上是一样的。 那么我们该怎么办？
En Passant (En Passant)
First, we need to decouple the science-fiction from science-fact. While fears of artificial generalized intelligence (AGI) run high, the real threat isn’t what’s happening in the future, it’s what’s happening right now. Redirecting the national and international focus onto the problems of today (job loss, data privacy, data ethics) is paramount to ensure that careful steps are taken towards the right direction. That requires a coordinated effort between computer scientists and journalists to dispel myths about artificial intelligence and focus on issues that may actually pose significant risks in the future. For example, algorithms that calculate your credit score or decide whether you should be hired shouldn’t be able to discriminate against you based on race²⁰.
首先，我们需要使科幻小说与科幻小说脱钩。 尽管人们对人工智能(AGI)的担忧越来越高，但真正的威胁不是未来正在发生的事情，而是现在正在发生的事情。 将国家和国际重点转移到当今的问题(失业，数据隐私，数据伦理)上，对于确保朝正确的方向采取谨慎的步骤至关重要。 这就需要计算机科学家和新闻工作者之间进行协调的努力，以消除有关人工智能的神话，并将注意力集中在将来可能真正构成重大风险的问题上。 例如，用于计算您的信用评分或决定是否应聘您的算法不应基于种族来区别您。
Second, we need companies on board. Many companies have stated outright that there needs to be better alignment on AI ethics. They’re right. And they can’t do it alone. In a previous chapter I mentioned Google’s Code of AI Ethics²¹, pointing out the fact that it’s incredibly vague. Unfortunately, at the company level, it doesn’t really matter how vague or specific your policies are if you can’t be reasonably convinced that all major players will follow them. The future of ethical artificial intelligence requires alignment across the vast array of institutions that are major players in the field — a “UN General Assembly” on Artificial Intelligence, if you will. And as ineffective as that may sound, at the very least it would indicate some message of alignment between the major players about the state, direction, and concerns of the technology at hand.
第二，我们需要公司。 许多公司直截了当地指出，需要在AI伦理上更好地保持一致。 他们是对的。 而且他们不能独自做到这一点。 在上一章中，我提到了Google的AI道德规范²¹，指出了这一点非常模糊。 不幸的是，在公司一级，如果您不能合理地确信所有主要参与者都将遵循这些政策，那么您的政策是否模糊或具体并不重要。 道德人工智能的未来需要跨领域主要参与者的众多机构保持一致，如果您愿意的话，必须召开“联合国人工智能大会”。 尽管听起来很无效，但至少会表明主要参与者之间在某种程度上就手头技术的状态，方向和关注达成了一致。
Third, the government. I know, I know. Groan. I’m not thrilled about it either. The government hasn’t exactly had the best track record for dealing with these kinds of problems, and this one is proving no different. But, like it or not, the government must play a role — in regulation, yes, but also in dealing with the potential wave of mass unemployment that will follow. Plans of implementing universal-basic income have been rolled out somewhat effectively on medium-to-large scales, especially as a response to the coronavirus outbreak (unfortunately, these successful rollouts exclude the United States, whose performance in this regard hasn’t been as stellar as its stars and bars would have you believe). Analyzing the impact of UBI in these contexts may give us valuable data on how to move forward. As for regulation, AI policy in the US predictably lags behind. In 2017, Congress passed the FUTURE of AI Act²², which among other things established a federal advisory committee, which in laymen’s terms amounts to practically nothing. Congress sets up advisory committees for everything. New bills introduced to the House are a bit more promising, with H.Res.153²³ targeting some of the societal implications of artificial intelligence mentioned earlier.
第三，政府。 我知道我知道。 呻吟。 我也不对此感到兴奋。 政府在处理这类问题方面并没有最好的记录，事实证明这也没有什么不同。 但是，不管喜欢与否，政府必须在监管中发挥作用，是的，但在应对随之而来的潜在大规模失业浪潮中。 从普遍到中等规模，已经普遍有效地实施了实现普遍基本收入的计划，特别是作为对冠状病毒爆发的回应(不幸的是，这些成功的推广不包括美国，美国在这方面的表现还不如美国)。恒星就像它的星星和金条会让您相信)。 分析UBI在这些情况下的影响可能会为我们提供有关前进的宝贵数据。 在法规方面，美国的AI政策可望落伍。 2017年，国会通过了《人工智能的未来法案》²，其中除其他外，还建立了一个联邦咨询委员会，按照外行的说法，这实际上什么都没有。 国会建立了一切问题的咨询委员会。 引入众议院的新法案更有希望， H.Res.153²³针对先前提到的人工智能的一些社会影响。
Finally, research. While the idea of ethical algorithms might sound like a whole lot of frou-frou for most, the field itself is actually incredibly rigorous and analytical. We have already made strides in data privacy with the development of a new concept called differential privacy, which encapsulates in a mathematical way a lot of the ideas about privacy we want to instill in our algorithms. There’s a fantastic book about it written by Michael Kearns and Aaron Roth, professors at the University of Pennsylvania, which you should read if you’re interested²⁴. Investing in the research of designing ethical algorithms could be the difference between feeling around in the dark and having a flashlight in our hands when it comes to developing algorithms for the future.
最后，研究。 尽管对于大多数人来说，道德算法的想法听起来似乎很麻烦，但该领域本身实际上是极其严格和分析的。 我们已经通过开发称为差分隐私的新概念在数据隐私方面取得了长足进步，该新概念以数学方式封装了许多我们希望灌输到算法中的隐私概念。 宾夕法尼亚大学教授Michael Kearns和Aaron Roth撰写了一本很棒的书，如果您有兴趣的话，应该阅读。 投资于设计道德算法的研究可能是黑暗中的感觉与手电之间的区别，这涉及到未来开发算法的过程。
These are just a few things that will be necessary for us as we move into the new age of artificial intelligence. These tools will come to define our relationship with technology as well as our place in society, and we had better come to grips with reality quickly.
这些只是我们进入人工智能新时代所必需的几件事。 这些工具将用来定义我们与技术的关系以及我们在社会中的地位，我们最好能快速地掌握现实。
爱情呢？ (What About Love?)
There might be something that has been bothering you all this time about my deep dive into minds, both biological and artificial. Earlier I mentioned the gifts that our brain gave us — intelligence and consciousness. What about consciousness? The ability to recognize that we are feeling, thinking beings?
一直以来，我深深地陷入了生物和人造的思想中，可能一直困扰着您。 早些时候，我提到了我们的大脑给我们的礼物-智力和意识。 那意识呢？ 认识到我们正在思考的能力，思想存在的能力？
Unfortunately, we haven’t a clue. For millennia, philosophers thought that the two were one and the same. It appears, at least for now, they’re not²⁵. To date, we’ve successfully created agents that can play chess, master facial recognition, and play music, but all without a lick of self-awareness or emotion. No remorse for the pawns, no glee at a smiling face, no sublime feeling at the flow of a melody. These machines can’t experience the most basic emotions, let alone complex ones like regret, embarrassment, or love.
不幸的是，我们没有任何线索。 几千年来，哲学家一直认为两者是相同的。 看来，至少到目前为止，它们还不是。 迄今为止，我们已经成功创建了可以下棋，掌握人脸识别和播放音乐的特工，但都没有一点自我意识或情感。 对棋子没有re悔之情，对微笑的笑容不高兴，对旋律的流动没有崇高的感觉。 这些机器无法体验最基本的情绪，更不用说诸如后悔，尴尬或爱情之类的复杂情绪了。
It might be the case that consciousness, and the emotions that arise from self-containment, is hard — computationally, mathematically, possibly even biologically. It’s a well known fact of behavioral psychology that we are more emotional than intelligent — that our emotions rule over our rationality. At the end of the day, we are feeling beings. Our rationality arises from the emotions we feel, not the other way around²⁶. So perhaps our future lies in unlocking some part of our emotional being, allowing us to differentiate ourselves from the intelligent agents we have created. But this is all, of course, speculation.
可能存在这样的情况，即意识和由自足引起的情绪很难-在计算，数学，甚至生物学上都很困难。 行为心理学的一个众所周知的事实是，我们比情感更聪明，而我们的情感支配我们的理性。 归根结底，我们感觉到了众生。 我们的理性源于我们的情感，而不是相反。 因此，也许我们的未来在于释放情感的一部分，使我们能够与已创建的智能代理区分开来。 但这当然是所有猜测。
In the next few chapters we will discuss, among other things, what happens when the systems we built care more about intelligence than consciousness, about accuracy over emotion. We will discuss that all-important motivator of progress in the technological age: data, and what it means to live in a data-driven economy. We will discuss what happens when enough becomes too much, and how we can live in a world with both too many resources and not enough to share. All this in the near future, whether you read it or not.
在接下来的几章中，我们将讨论，除其他外，当我们构建的系统更关注智力而非意识，关注准确性胜于情感时会发生什么。 我们将讨论技术时代进步的最重要动机：数据，以及生活在数据驱动型经济中的意义。 我们将讨论当足够多的东西变得过多时会发生什么，以及我们如何生活在资源太多而共享不足的世界中。 无论您是否阅读，在不久的将来所有这些。
But I’ll leave you with this. Our minds are some of the most magnificent systems in the universe, and we aren’t even close to cracking what makes them work. It is, in my opinion, the most noble of causes to understand how to model and understand it — to know thyself, if you will. But along the way, we must be vigilant in knowing what we give up when we create systems that can outperform us on an intelligent level. We’ve come a long way from the days of World War II, when we used computers to crack encrypted German messages. We’ve come a long way since the days of the Space Race, where computers were used to calculate trajectories of rockets (and the people inside them) into space. We’ve even come a long way since the introduction of the personal computer into our modern homes. Today’s algorithms are faster, smarter, and more adaptable than the algorithms of old. When we order from Amazon’s Echo, we do so not because some AI overlord is forcing us to, we do so because it’s convenient. Same thing for why you prefer to watch free videos on YouTube and search the internet on Google. We listen to music on Spotify, and are pleasantly surprised when its algorithms pick similar music for us. We like having more and more content to view on Instagram — hand-tailored to our preferences. In short, the AI revolution won’t be loud. It won’t come with the sound of robots knocking down our doors. No, no, no. Let’s be very clear: the AI revolution will happen because we wanted it to. Because at the end of the day, it was just so much easier to leave the door wide open.
但是我会留给你的。 我们的思维是宇宙中最宏伟的系统之一，我们甚至还无法破解使它们起作用的原因。 我认为，这是了解如何建模和理解它的最崇高的理由-如果愿意的话，可以了解自己。 但是在此过程中，我们必须保持警惕，知道在创建可以在智能水平上胜过我们的系统时放弃的东西。 自第二次世界大战以来，我们已经走了很长一段路，当时我们使用计算机来破解加密的德语邮件。 自太空竞赛时代以来，我们已经走了很长一段路，在太空竞赛中，计算机用于计算火箭(及其内部人员)进入太空的轨迹。 自从将个人计算机引入现代家庭以来，我们甚至已经走了很长一段路。 如今的算法比旧的算法更快，更智能且更具适应性。 当我们从亚马逊的Echo订购时，我们这样做并不是因为某些AI霸主强迫我们这样做，而是因为它很方便。 同样的原因，为什么您更喜欢在YouTube上观看免费视频并在Google上搜索互联网。 我们在Spotify上听音乐，当它的算法为我们选择相似的音乐时，我们会感到惊喜。 我们喜欢在Instagram上查看越来越多的内容-根据我们的喜好进行手工定制。 简而言之，人工智能革命不会响亮。 它不会伴随着机器人敲门的声音。 不不不。 我们非常清楚：人工智能革命将发生，因为我们希望这样做。 因为归根结底， 敞开大门要容易得多。
Next Chapter: When More Becomes Too Much→
下一章：当更多变得过多→
[1] Reuteler, David. The Drawings of Leonardo Da Vinci, www.drawingsofleonardo.org/.
[1] Reuteler，David。 达芬奇绘画 ， www.drawingsofleonardo.org /。
[2] Philo, Ron, and Kevin Petti. “Leonardo da Vinci: Images of the Brain.” The FASEB Journal 32 (2018): 781–8. https://www.fasebj.org/doi/abs/10.1096/fasebj.2018.32.1_supplement.781.8
[2] Philo，Ron和Kevin Petti。 “莱昂纳多·达·芬奇：大脑图像。” FASEB Journal 32(2018)：781–8。 https://www.fasebj.org/doi/abs/10.1096/fasebj.2018.32.1_supplement.781.8
[3] Penttila, Nicky. “The Hidden Neuroscience of Leonardo Da Vinci.” Dana Foundation, Dana Foundation, 30 Apr. 2020, dana.org/article/the-hidden-neuroscience-of-leonardo-da-vinci/.
[3] Penttila，Nicky。 “达芬奇的隐形神经科学。” 达纳基金会 (Dana Foundation)， 达纳基金会 (Dana Foundation)，2020年4月30日，dana.org / article / the-hidden-neuroscience-of-leonardo-da-vinci /。
[4] Isaacson, Walter. Leonardo Da Vinci. , 2017. Print.
[4]艾萨克森，沃尔特。 达芬奇(Leonardo Da Vinci) 。 ，2017年。印刷。
[5] da Mota Gomes, M. “From the wax cast of brain ventricles (1508–9) by Leonardo da Vinci to air cast ventriculography (1918) by Walter E. Dandy.” Revue neurologique (2020).
[5] M. da Mota Gomes，“从Leonardo da Vinci的脑室蜡铸模(1508–9)到Walter E. Dandy的空气铸模脑室描记法(1918)。” 神经病学评论 (2020)。
[6] Bentivoglio, Marina. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1906.” NobelPrize.org, Nobel Media AB 2020, 20 Apr. 1998, www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1906/cajal/article/.
[6] Bentivoglio，玛丽娜。 “ 1906年诺贝尔生理学或医学奖。” NobelPrize.org ，Nobel Media AB 2020，1998年4月20日， www.nobelprize.org / prizes / medicine / 1906 / cajal / article /。
[7] Bergland, Christopher. “The Father of Modern Neuroscience Was an Athlete and Artist.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 27 Jan. 2017, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-athletes-way/201701/the-father-modern-neuroscience-was-athlete-and-artist.
[7] Bergland，克里斯托弗。 “现代神经科学之父是一名运动员和艺术家。” 《今日心理学》 ，苏塞克斯出版公司，2017年1月27日， www.psychologytoday.com / us / blog / the-athletes-way / 201701 / the-father-modern-neuroscience-was-athlete-and-artist。
[8] Huff, Trevor, Navid Mahabadi, and Prasanna Tadi. “Neuroanatomy, visual cortex.” StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing, 2019.
[8]霍夫(Huff)，特雷弗(Trevor)，纳维·玛哈巴迪(Navid Mahabadi)和普拉萨纳·塔迪(Prasanna Tadi)。 “神经解剖学，视觉皮层。” StatPearls [互联网] 。 StatPearls出版，2019。
[9] Tanaka K. Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:109–139. doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.19.030196.000545
[9] Tanaka K.颞下皮质和物体视觉。 神经科学年鉴 。 1996; 19：109-139。 doi：10.1146 / annurev.ne.19.030196.000545
[10] Pandey, Parul. “Understanding the Mathematics behind Gradient Descent.” Medium, Towards Data Science, 17 Jan. 2020, towardsdatascience.com/understanding-the-mathematics-behind-gradient-descent-dde5dc9be06e.
[10] Pandey，Parul。 “了解梯度下降背后的数学。” 媒介 ，走向数据科学，2020年1月17日，朝向datascience.com/understanding-the-mathematics-behind-gradient-descent-dde5dc9be06e。
[11] Eschner, Kat. “Computers Are Great at Chess, But That Doesn’t Mean the Game Is ‘Solved’.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution, 10 Feb. 2017, www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/what-first-man-lose-computer-said-about-chess-21st-century-180962046/.
[11]埃施纳，凯特。 “计算机在国际象棋方面很出色，但这并不意味着游戏就已经解决了。” Smithsonian.com ，Smithsonian Institution，2017年2月10日， www.smithsonianmag.com / smart-news / what-first-man-lose-computer-said-about-chess-21st-century-180962046 /。
[12] “AlphaGo: The Story so Far.” Deepmind, deepmind.com/research/case-studies/alphago-the-story-so-far.
[12]“ AlphaGo：到目前为止的故事。” Deepmind ，deepmind.com/ research /case- studies /alphago-the-story-so-far。
[13] Goodfellow, Ian, et al. “Generative adversarial nets.” Advances in neural information processing systems. 2014.
[13] Ian等人，Goodfellow。 “对抗性网络。” 神经信息处理系统的研究进展 。 2014。
[14] Zhu, Jun-Yan, et al. “Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks.” Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. 2017.
[14]朱俊彦等。 “使用周期一致的对抗网络进行不成对的图像到图像的翻译。” IEEE国际计算机视觉会议论文集 。 2017。
[15] Salian, Isha. “Stroke of Genius: GauGAN Turns Doodles into Stunning, Photorealistic Landscapes.” The Official NVIDIA Blog, 18 Mar. 2019, blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2019/03/18/gaugan-photorealistic-landscapes-nvidia-research/.
[15] Salian，Isha。 “天才之笔：GauGAN将涂鸦变成令人惊叹的逼真的风景。” NVIDIA官方博客 ，2019年3月18日，blogs.nvidia.com / blog / 2019/03/18 / gaugan-photorealistic-landscapes-nvidia-research /。
[16] Roose, Kevin. “Here Come the Fake Videos, Too.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 5 Mar. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/technology/fake-videos-deepfakes.html.
[16]罗斯，凯文。 “假视频也来了。” 纽约时报》 ，《纽约时报》，2018年3月5日， www.nytimes.com / 2018/03/04 / technology / fake-videos-deepfakes.html。
[17] Radford, Alec. “Better Language Models and Their Implications.” OpenAI, OpenAI, 11 May 2020, openai.com/blog/better-language-models/.
[17]拉德福德，亚历克。 “更好的语言模型及其含义。” OpenAI ，OpenAI，2020年5月11日，openai.com / blog / better-language-models /。
[18] Payne, Christine McLeavey. “MuseNet.” OpenAI, OpenAI, 29 June 2020, openai.com/blog/musenet/.
[18]佩恩，克里斯汀·麦克里维。 “ MuseNet。” OpenAI ，OpenAI，2020年6月29日，openai.com / blog / musenet /。
[19] Garbade, Michael J. “10 First Jobs That Will Be Eliminated by AI.” Medium, Medium, 30 Aug. 2019, medium.com/@ledumjg/10-first-jobs-that-will-be-eliminated-by-ai-c5c481b5ecbb.
[19] Garbade，MichaelJ。“人工智能将消除的10项首要工作。” Medium ，Medium，2019年8月30日，medium.com/@ledumjg/10-first-jobs-ai-c5c481b5ecbb将被消除。
[20] Smith, Allen. “AI: Discriminatory Data In, Discrimination Out.” SHRM, SHRM, 28 Feb. 2020, www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/artificial-intelligence-discriminatory-data.aspx.
[20]史密斯，艾伦。 “ AI：歧视性数据输入，歧视性输出。” SHRM ，SHRM，2020年2月28日， www.shrm.org / resourcesandtools / legal-and-compliance / employment-law / pages / artificial-intelligence-discriminatory-data.aspx。
[21] Pichai, Sundar. “AI at Google: Our Principles.” Google, Google, 7 June 2018, www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/.
[21] Pichai，Sundar。 “ Google的AI：我们的原则。” Google ，Google，2018年6月7日， www.blog.google / technology / ai / ai-principles /。
[22] “AI Policy — United States.” Future of Life Institute, futureoflife.org/ai-policy-united-states/?cn-reloaded=1.
[22]“人工智能政策-美国。” 未来人生研究所 ，futureoflife.org / ai-policy-united-states /？cn-reloaded = 1。
[23] Lawrence, Brenda L. “Text — H.Res.153–116th Congress (2019–2020): Supporting the Development of Guidelines for Ethical Development of Artificial Intelligence.” Congress.gov, 27 Feb. 2019, www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/153/text.
[23]劳伦斯，布伦达·L。“案文– H.Res.153–116国会(2019–2020)：支持制定人工智能伦理发展准则。” Congress.gov ，2019年2月27日， www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/153/text。
[24] Kearns, Michael J., and Aaron Roth. The Ethical Algorithm: the Science of Socially Aware Algorithm Design. Oxford University Press, 2020.
[24] Kearns，Michael J.和Aaron Roth。 道德算法：社交意识算法设计科学 。 牛津大学出版社，2020年。
[25] Harari, Yuval N. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. [Toronto, Ontario]: Signal, 2015.
[25] Harari，Yuval N. Homo Deus：《明天简史》 。 [安大略省多伦多]：信号，2015年。
[26] Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Pantheon Books, 2012. Print.
[26] Haidt，乔纳森。 正义的心：为什么好人会被政治和宗教所分隔 。 纽约：万神殿书籍，2012年。印刷。
3023
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
