• Front Page
    • Digital Education
    • Terry Freedman's Books Bulletin
  • RSS
  • Search
    • Welcome
    • The "About" Page
    • Testimonials
    • CV/Resumé
    • My Writing
    • Published articles
  • Corrections Policy
Menu

ICT & Computing in Education

Articles on education technology and related topics
  • Front Page
  • Newsletters
    • Digital Education
    • Terry Freedman's Books Bulletin
  • RSS
  • Search
  • Info
    • Welcome
    • The "About" Page
    • Testimonials
    • CV/Resumé
    • My Writing
    • Published articles
  • Corrections Policy

Too protective by half?

Why I dread the thought of benign algorithms (Updated)

December 19, 2021

Ray Kurzweil predicted that:

“The technological singularity occurs as artificial intelligences surpass human beings as the smartest and most capable life forms on the Earth. Technological development is taken over by the machines, who can think, act and communicate so quickly that normal humans cannot even comprehend what is going on. The machines enter into a “runaway reaction” of self-improvement cycles, with each new generation of A.I.s appearing faster and faster. From this point onwards, technological advancement is explosive, under the control of the machines, and thus cannot be accurately predicted (hence the term “Singularity”).”

— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_made_by_Ray_Kurzweil#2045:_The_Singularity

This idea is sometimes used by people to predict that machines, having no further use for us, will decide to get rid of us once and for all.

But what if intelligent computers decide, instead, to look after us, and protect us from ourselves?

For example, if we extrapolate from the existence of driverless cars, will there come a time when we won’t be able to drive — because either our laws or our machines won’t allow us to? No doubt the number and severity of road accidents would be cut, which would be an advantage. But what about those of us who not only enjoy driving, but are pretty good at it?

What would be good, I think, would be to introduce a law whereby passing your driving test isn’t enough — mainly because if our cars won’t let us drive then driving tests are irrelevant. However, for those of us willing to put the time and effort into undertaking — and passing — an advanced driving course, there should be a dispensation of some sort. That is to say, such people should be permitted to drive if they wish.

Can you imagine the furore on social media about such 'discrimination', the 'nanny state' and so on?

This is just one area in which the singularity might be characterised by computers being so protective of us that life is simply not lived to the full.

We can glean some feeling of this from what is already happening with kids. In 2015 I watched a tv series called Back in Time for the Weekend, in which a typical British family spends a week living through a previous decade.

During their period in the 1960s (I think), the youngest, who is about 12, said that he had been allowed to play in the park with his friends, without his parents around, for the first time in his life. An article in the Daily Mail newspaper in 2013 bears this out:

“Half of adults played outside at least seven times a week when they were growing up — but less than a quarter of children are allowed as much freedom today.”

— http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385722/Parents-anxieties-children-playing-indoors-Fears-traffic-strangers-leading-creeping-disappearance-youngsters-parks.html

(A few days ago we were watching a film about London, made in 1967. Some of the shots were of children playing in the street, and both my wife and I commented on how lovely it was. That’s sad.)

Imagine being in the situation where your kitchen won’t allow you to rustle up an egg in case you burn yourself, your car won’t allow you to drive to the shops to get the eggs in the first place, and if you try to contact a few friends to invite them over for an eggy breakfast your computerised contacts system won’t allow you to because sometimes they wind you up and raise your blood pressure.

There used to be a programme called Sliders on tv, in which the central characters moved temprorarily into alterntive versions of their own universe. In one such variant, fast food restaurants woudn't serve you a hamburger unless you could produce a medical certificate stating that you were fit enough (in terms of heart, cholesterol etc) to eat it.

At least there you would have the option of threatening the vendor (if you're that way inclined) or attempting to bribe him (ditto), but how do you circumvent orders dictated by a computer following an algorithm?

An earlier version of this article was originally published on the ICT & Computing and Medium websites. For more discussion points to use in your classroom, sign up for Digital Education, my free newsletter.

In News & views, Unintended consequences, From the Archives, Discussion topic Tags Ray Kurzweil, singularity, algorithms, discussion
← Provide timely information (even if it makes you unpopular)Coming soon (ish): my top ten education books of 2021 →
Recent book reviews
The Teachers' Standards in Primary Schools.jpg
Quick look: The Teachers' Standards in Primary Schools

This is very well set out. It takes each standard, and gives you ideas on how to achieve it, and what success in this context looks like.

Read more →
How Computer Games Help Children learn.jpg
Quick look: How Computer Games Help Children learn

When I was teaching Econnures I realised that I could have taught quite a chunk of the synabus if I'd been able to run Sim City on the school network.

Read more →
Reinventing Project-Based learning.jpg
Quick look: Reinventing Project-Based Learning

I can verify from first hand experience that PBL kept students highly engaged, and helped them to develop skills such as working with others and independent research.

Read more →
The human touch.jpg
Quick look: The Human Touch

Although this book is published by the BCS, the Chartered Institute for IT, the focus is not on IT at all.

Read more →
Better Living through science.jpg
Quick look: Better Living through science

I have often thought that I would have been much more interested in science at school, and been much more successful at it, had the teachers taught us anything of practical value.

Read more →
Tubes.jpg
Quick look: Tubes: Behind the scenes at the internet

We are all so accustomed to using the internet, searching the world wide web — "going online" — that most of us most of the time probably do not stop to consider the question: yes, but where exactly is it?

Read more →
profits, prophets.jpg
Quick look: Profits, Prophets, Coaches and Kings: (When) do leaders make a difference?

I have somewhat dichotomous views of this question of whether leaders make a difference, or much of a difference.

Read more →
power up.jpg
Review: Power Up, by Matthew Lane

This book looks at the maths concepts — and, to some extent, the physics concepts — hidden in popular video games.

Read more →
Shortest History of AI.jpg
Review: The Shortest History of AI

How is it that ChatGPT, Claude and other Al models appear to perform so well at certain complex tasks that some people become convinced that they're sentient — only for them to then promptly fail at simple tasks that even a child could handle?

Read more →
teacher geek.jpg
Review: Teacher Geek

Every so often I like to take a look, or another look, at a book published a while ago, and today I’ve been looking at Teacher Geek, by Rachel Jones.

Read more →
Dig+Ed+Banner.jpg

Contact us

Privacy

Cookies

Terms and conditions

This website is powered by Squarespace

(c) Terry Freedman All Rights Reserved