Since June I have been expressing generally contrarian views on AI, that it will not fulfill the concerns and expectations it has gathered since its February news explosion. As always, there are many facets of its progress. What are some of the favorable ones from the past month?
In Fox News on December 20th, Melissa Rudy
published “Artificial intelligence experts share 6 of the biggest AI
innovations of 2023: ‘A landmark year.’”
The advances, all medical-related, were “ChatGPT and other generative AI,”
the subject of the blitz above which “has revolutionized health care
communication by providing tools for personalized treatment plans and remote
patient engagement,” though “its responses have sometimes been found lacking in
accuracy and thoroughness”; “disease detection through retinal images,” which
as of September “excels in diagnosing and predicting both eye diseases and
systemic disorders such as heart failure and myocardial infarction”;
“improvements to medical productivity,” also in assessing problems using retinal
photography; “medical imaging and education” by “faster scanning times,
enhanced image resolution and reduced radiation exposure”; “accelerated cancer
research” through “using it to find hidden patterns in data, personalize
treatment decision-making and help predict treatment benefit”; and “AI medical
devices,” at least one-third of 692 AI-incorporating now FDA-approved added
since 2022.
Another new product was the subject of “The next generation
of Tesla’s humanoid robot makes its debut” (Kurt Knutsson, Fox News,
December 24th). This
automaton “designed to be a general-purpose machine that can assist humans in
various domains, such as manufacturing, construction, healthcare and
entertainment,” is made up to have an almost-human frame, with hands having “11
degrees of freedom… equipped with tactile sensors and faster actuators, which
allow it to manipulate objects with more precision and dexterity” among other
refinements. Overall, per Knutsson, this
item “is a stunning example of how far humanoid robotics has come and how far
it can go.”
In the December 27th New York Times,
Andrew Ross Sorkin took a stab at “What’s next in A.I.?” He got information from “some of the world’s
foremost experts in artificial intelligence,” and used it “to gauge what could
be in store for the buzzy technology in the year ahead.” Yet a section by Vivienne Walt claimed that
“if 2023 was the year the world woke up to A.I., 2024 might be the year in
which its legal and technical limits will be tested, and perhaps
breached.” Also, “judges and lawmakers
will increasingly weigh in,” “some fear overloading A.I. businesses with
regulations,” a prediction that “A.I capabilities will soar,” and “billions in
investment will be needed.”
Last, we had a look at “How the Federal Government Can Rein
In A.I. in Law Enforcement” (Joy Buolamwini and Barry Friedman, The New York
Times, January 2nd). The
problems appear when “law enforcement deploys emerging technologies without
transparency or community agreement that they should be used at all, with
little or no consideration of the consequences, insufficient training and
inadequate guardrails.” A proposal from
the federal Office of Management and Budget states that “agencies must be
transparent and provide a public inventory of cases in which A.I. was used,” in
which “the risks to individuals… must be identified and reduced.” However, “there is also a vague exception for
“national security,”” which, per the authors, “requires a sharper
definition.”
Artificial intelligence has contributed more than the
generally incremental and future-bound achievements here. Yet it is difficult to tease out what has
happened over the past ten months from what was there before and what hasn’t
actually happened yet.
What are less favorable things that have occurred around
AI? That will be the subject of next
week’s post.
No comments:
Post a Comment