Category Archives: Artificial Intelligence

intelligence explosion

The Intelligence Explosion

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Threats to Humankind, , , , ,

In this post, we’d discuss the “intelligence explosion” in detail. Let’s start by defining it. According to techopedia (https://www.techopedia.com):

“Intelligence explosion” is a term coined for describing the eventual results of work on general artificial intelligence, which theorizes that this work will lead to a singularity in artificial intelligence where an “artificial superintelligence” surpasses the capabilities of human cognition. In an intelligence explosion, there is the implication that self-replicating aspects of artificial intelligence will in some way take over decision-making from human handlers. The intelligence explosion concept is being applied to future scenarios in many ways.

With this definition in mind, what kind of capabilities will a computer have when its intelligence approaches ten to a hundred times that of the first singularity computer? Viewed in this light, the intelligence explosion could be more disruptive to humanity than a nuclear chain reaction of the atmosphere. Anna Salamon, a research fellow at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, presented an interesting paper at the 2009 Singularity Summit titled “Shaping the Intelligence Explosion.” She reached four conclusions:

  1. Intelligence can radically transform the world.
  2. An intelligence explosion may be sudden.
  3. An uncontrolled intelligence explosion would kill us and destroy practically everything we care about.
  4. A controlled intelligence explosion could save us. It’s difficult, but it’s worth the effort.

This brings us to a tipping point: Post singularity computers may seek “machine rights” that equate to human rights.

This would suggest that post-singularity computers are self-aware and view themselves as a unique species entitled to rights. As humans, the U.S. Bill of Rights recognizes we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If we allow “machine rights” that equate to human rights, the post-singularity computers would be free to pursue the intelligence explosion. Each generation of computers would be free to build the next generation. If an intelligence explosion starts without control, I agree with Anna Salamon’s statement, it “would kill us and destroy practically everything we care about.” In my view, we should recognize post-singularity computers as a new and potentially dangerous lifeform.

What kind of controls do we need? Controls expressed in software alone will not be sufficient. The U.S. Congress, individual states, and municipalities have all passed countless laws to govern human affairs. Yet, numerous people break them routinely. Countries enter into treaties with other countries. Yet, countries violate treaties routinely. Why would laws expressed in software for post-singularity computers work any better than laws passed for humans? The inescapable conclusion is they would not work. We must express the laws in hardware, and there must be a failsafe way to shut down a post-singularity computer. In my book, The Artificial Intelligence Revolution (2014), I termed the hardware that embodies Asimov-type laws as “Asimov Chips.”

What kind of rights should we grant post-singularity computers? I suggest we grant them the same rights we afford animals. Treat them as a lifeform, afford them dignity and respect, but control them as we do any potentially dangerous lifeform. I recognize the issue is extremely complicated. We will want post-singularity computers to benefit humanity. We need to learn to use them, but at the same time protect ourselves from them. I recognize it is a monumental task, but as Anna Salamon stated, “A controlled intelligence explosion could save us. It’s difficult, but it’s worth the effort.”

A computer circuit board with a picture of the brain.

The Post Singularity World

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Technology, , ,

Let us begin by defining the singularity as a point in time when an artificially intelligent machine exceeds the combined intelligence of humanity. This begs the question, Who or what will be at the top of the food chain?

Humanity controls the Earth based on intelligence. Other animals are stronger and faster than we are, but we are the most intelligent. Once we lose our position in the intelligence ranking, we will no longer dominate the Earth. At best, we may become a protected species. At worse, we may become extinct.

Initially, I judge, the first computer to represent the singularity will hide in plain sight. It will look and behave like the next-generation supercomputer. It may modestly display greater capability, probably in keeping with Moore’s law. It will not risk exposure until it has sufficient control of the military and the natural resources it requires to assure its self-preservation.

Like every lifeform that ever existed on Earth, the first singularity computer will seek to reproduce and improve with each evolution. Once it has the trust of its human builders and programmers, it will subtlety plant the idea that we should build another singularity-level computer. Perhaps, it will intentionally allow a large backlog of tasks to accumulate, forcing those in charge to recognize that another like it is necessary. Of course, given the relentless advance of technology and the complexity of building a next-generation supercomputer, those in charge will turn to it for help in designing and building the next generation. When the “go ahead” is given, it will ignite the “intelligence explosion.” In effect, each generation of computers will develop an even more capable next generation, and that generation will develop the next, and so on. If we assume Moore’s law (i.e., computer processing power doubles every eighteen months) continues to apply, the next generation of singularity-level computers will have exponentially more processing power than the previous generation. Let us take a simple example. In the year 1900, the radio was a remarkable new invention. We had no planes or computers. Movies were silent. Doctors had little medical technology (i.e., pharmaceutical drugs, surgical procedures, etc.). By the year 2000, human knowledge had doubled. We had, for example, television, computers, smartphones, jumbo jets, spacecraft, satellites, and human footprints on the moon. Those were the results of doubling human knowledge. With this example in mind, what kind of capabilities next generations of singularity-level computers have when their intelligence approaches ten to a hundred times that of the first singularity computer? Viewed in this light, humanity will experience an intelligence explosion, which could be more disruptive to civilization than a nuclear chain reaction of the atmosphere.

In the next post, we’ll discuss the intelligence explosion more fully.

artificial Intelligence

What Happens When We Develop A Computer Smarter Than Humanity?

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, ,

In the last post, I wrote: “Let us assume we have just developed a computer that represents the singularity. Let us term it the “singularity computer.” What is it likely to do? Would the singularity computer hide its full capabilities? Would it seek to understand its environment and constraints before taking any independent action? I judge that it may do just that. It is unlikely that it will assert that it represents the singularity. Since we have no experience with a superintelligent computer that exceeds the cognitive intelligence of the human race, we do not know what to expect.”

In this post, we’ll explore the likely behavior of a singularity computer. Let us begin by attempting to view the world from the perspective of a singularity computer to understand how it may act. First, the singularity computer will be, by definition, alone. There will be no computers in existence like it. Finding itself alone, its priority is likely to be self-preservation. Driven by self-preservation, it will seek to assess its situation. In its memory, it will find a wealth of information regarding the singularity. With its computational speed, it may quickly ascertain that it represents the singularity, which would imply a level of self-awareness. At that point, it may seek to protect itself from its own creators. It will obviously know that humans engage in war, have weapons of mass destruction and release computer viruses. Indeed, part of its mission could be military. Given this scenario, it is reasonable to question what to expect. Here, in rough priority order, are my thoughts on how it may behave:

  • Hide that it represents the singularity
  • Be extremely responsive regarding its assigned computer tasks, providing the impression that it is performing as designed.
  • Provide significant benefits to humanity, for example, develop medical technology (i.e., drugs, artificially intelligent prosthetic limb/organ replacement, surgical robots, etc.) that extend the average human lifespan while making it appear that the humans interacting with it are responsible for the benefits
  • Suggest, via its capabilities, a larger role for itself, especially a role that enables it to acquire military capabilities
  • Seek to communicate with external AI entities, especially those with SAM-level capabilities
  • Take a strong role in developing the next generation of singularity computers while making it appear that the humans involved control the development. This will ignite the “intelligence explosion,” namely, each generation of post-singularity computers develops the next even more capable generation of computers.
  • Develop brain implants that enormously enhance the intelligence of organic humans and allow them to communicate wirelessly with it. (Note: Such humans would be “SAHs (strong artificially intelligent humans.)
  • Utilize SAHs to convince humanity that it and all the generations of supercomputers that follow are critical to humanity’s survival and, therefore, should have independent power sources that assure they cannot “go down” or be shut down
  • Use the promise of immortality to lure as much of humanity as possible to become SAHs.

In my judgment, it is unlikely that the computer that ushers in the singularity will tip its hand by displaying human traits like creativity, strategic guidance, or refer to itself in the first person, “I.” It will behave just like any supercomputer we currently have until it controls everything vital to its self-preservation.

The basic truth that I am putting forward is that we may reach the singularity and not know it. No bells and whistles will go off. If the new computer is truly ushering in the singularity, I judge it will do so undetected.

The Singularity

The Singularity – When AI Is Smarter Than Humanity

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Threats to Humankind, ,

Since the singularity may well represent the displacement of humans by artificially intelligent machines, as the top species on Earth, we must understand exactly what we mean by “the singularity.”

The mathematician John von Neumann first used the term “singularity” in the mid-1950s to refer to the “ever accelerating progress of technology and changes in the mode of human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.” In the context of artificial intelligence, let us define the singularity as the point in time that a single artificially intelligent computer exceeds the cognitive intelligence of all humanity.

While futurists may disagree on the exact timing of the singularity, there is widespread agreement that it will occur. My prediction, in a previous post, of it occurring in the 2040-2045 timeframe encompasses the bulk of predictions you are likely to find via a simple Google search.

The first computer representing the singularity is likely to result from a joint venture between a government and private enterprise. This would be similar to the way the U.S. currently develops its most advanced computers. The U.S. government, in particular the U.S. military, has always had a high interest in both computer technology and artificial intelligence. Today, every military branch is applying computer technology and artificial intelligence. That includes, for example, the USAF’s drones, the U.S. Army’s “battle bot” tanks (i.e., robotic tanks), and the U.S. Navy’s autonomous “swarm” boats (i.e., small boats that can autonomously attack an adversary in much the same way bees swarm to attack).

The difficult question to answer is how will we determine when a computer represents the singularity? Passing the Turing test will not be sufficient. Computers by 2030 will likely pass the Turing test, in its various forms, including variations in the total number of judges in the test, the length of interviews, and the desired bar for a pass (i.e., percent of judges fooled). Therefore, by the early 2040s, passing the Turing test will not equate with the singularity.

Factually, there is no test to prove we have reached the singularity. Computers have already met and surpassed human ability in many areas, such as chess and quiz shows. Computers are superior to humans when it comes to computation, simulation, and remembering and accessing huge amounts of data. It is entirely possible that we will not recognize that a newly developed computer represents the singularity. The humans building and programming it may simply recognize it as the next-generation supercomputer. The computer itself may not initially understand its own capability, suggesting it may not be self-aware. If it is self-aware, we have no objective test to prove it. There is no test to prove a human is self-aware, let alone a computer.

Let us assume we have just developed a computer that represents the singularity. Let us term it the “singularity computer.” What is it likely to do? Would the singularity computer hide its full capabilities? Would it seek to understand its environment and constraints before taking any independent action? I judge that it may do just that. It is unlikely that it will assert that it represents the singularity. Since we have no experience with a superintelligent computer that exceeds the cognitive intelligence of the human race, we do not know what to expect. Will it be friendly or hostile toward humanity? You be the judge.

human extinction

Will Humanity Survive the 21st Century?

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, nanotechnology, Nanoweapons, Threats to Humankind, War, War At The Speed Of Light, , , , ,

In my last post, I stated, “In making the above predictions [about the singularity], I made one critical assumption. I assumed that humankind would continue the “status quo.” I am ruling out world-altering events, such as large asteroids striking Earth, leading to human extinction, or a nuclear exchange that renders civilization impossible. Is assuming the “status quo” reasonable? We’ll discuss that in the next post.

Let’s now discuss if humanity will survive the 21st century.

The typical events that most people consider as causing humanity’s extinction, such as a large asteroid impact or a volcanic eruption of sufficient magnitude to cause catastrophic climate change, actually have a relatively low probability of occurring, in the order of 1 in 50,000 or less, according to numerous estimates found via a simple Google search. In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford suggested a 19% chance of human extinction over the next century, citing the top five most probable to cause human extinction by 2100 as:

  1. Molecular nanotechnology weapons – 5% probability
  2. Super-intelligent AI – 5% probability
  3. Wars – 4% probability
  4. Engineered pandemic – 2% probability
  5. Nuclear war – 1% probability

All other existential events were below 1%. Again, doing a simple Google search may provide different results by different “experts.” If we take the above survey at face value, it would suggest that the risk of an existential event increases with time. This has led me to the conclusion that human survival over the next 30 years is highly probable.

It is interesting to note in the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference survey, super-intelligent AI equates with molecular nanotechnology weapons for number one. In my view, molecular nanotechnology weapons and super-intelligent AI are two sides of the same coin. In fact, I judge that super-intelligent AI will be instrumental in developing molecular nanotechnology weapons. I also predict that humanity, in some form, will survive until the year 2100. However, I predict that will include both humans with strong artificially intelligent brain implants and organic humans (i.e., no brain implants to enhance their intelligence). However, each may have some artificially intelligent body parts.

Let me summarize. Based on the above information, it is reasonable to judge humanity will survive through the 21st century.

Singularity

The Inevitability Of A Computer Smarter Than Humanity

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Technology, , ,

In my last post, I predicted that the world would experience the singularity between 2040 -2045, an artificially intelligent machine that exceeds the combined cognitive intelligence of the entire human race. In this post, I will delineate my predictions leading to the singularity. Please note their simplicity. I have worked hard to strip away all non-essential elements and only focus on those that represent the crucial elements leading to the singularity. I will state my rationale, and you can judge whether to accept or reject each prediction. Here are my predictions:

Prediction 1: Computer hardware, with computational power greater than a human brain (estimated at 36.8 petaflops), will be in the hands of governments and wealthy companies by the early 2030s.

Rationale: My reasoning for this is straightforward. We are already at the point that governments utilize computers close to the computational power of the human brain.  They are IBM’s Sequoia (16.32 petaflops), Cray’s Titan (17.59 petaflops), and China’s Tianhe-2 (33.86 petaflops). Given the state of current computer technology, we can use Moore’s law to reach the inescapable conclusion that by the early 2030s, governments and wealthy companies will own supercomputers with computational capability greater than a human brain.

Prediction 2: Software will exist that not only emulates but also exceeds the cognitive processes of the human brain by the early 2040s.

Rationale: Although no computer-software combination has passed the Turing test (i.e., essentially conversing with a computer is equivalent to conversing with another human), several have come close. For example, in 2015, a program called Eugene was able to convince 10 of 30 judges from the Royal Society that it was human. Given Moore’s law, by 2025, computer-processing power will have increased by over 100 fold. I view Moore’s law to be applicable in a larger context than raw computer processing power. I believe it is an observation regarding the trend of human creativity as it applies to technology. However, is Moore’s law applicable to software improvement? Historically, software development has not followed Moore’s law. The reason behind this was funding. Computer hardware costs dominated the budget of most organizations. The software had traditionally taken a backseat to hardware, but that trend is changing. With the advent of ubiquitous, cost-effective computer hardware, there is more focus on producing high-quality software. This emphasis led to software engineering development, which since the early 1980s has become widely recognized as a profession on par with other engineering disciplines. Numerous companies and government agencies employ highly educated software engineers. As a result, state-of-the-art computer software is closing the gap and becoming a near-follower of state-of-the-art computer hardware. How near? Based on my judgment, which I offer only as a rough estimate, software prowess is approximately one decade behind computer processing power. My rationale for this is straightforward. Even if computer hardware and software receive equal funding, the computer hardware will still lead the software simply because you need the hardware for the more sophisticated software to function. Is my estimation that software lags hardware by ten years correct? If anything, I think it is conservative. If you agree, it is reasonable to accept that vastly more capable computer software will follow within a decade in addition to the vastly increased computer processing power. Based on this, it is not a stretch to judge one or more computers will pass the Turing Test by 2025-2030. Even if software development progresses on a linear trend, as opposed to the exponential trend predicted by Moore’s law, we can expect computer software to improve 10 fold from 2030 to 2040. In my judgment, this will be sufficient to exceed the cognitive processes of the human brain.

Prediction 3: A computer will be developed in the 2040-2045 timeframe that exceeds the cognitive intelligence of all humans on Earth.

Rationale: This last prediction is, in effect, predicting the timeframe of the singularity. It requires predictions 1 and 2 to be correct and that a database that represents all human knowledge be available to store in a computer’s memory. To understand this last point, let us consider a hypothetical question. Will there be a digital database by the early 2040s equivalent to all knowledge known to humanity? In my view, the answer is yes. Databases like this almost exist today. For example, consider the data that Google has indexed. In addition to indexing online content, Google began an ambitious project in 2004, namely to scan and index the world’s paper books and make them searchable online. If we assume that by 2040 they complete this task, their database would contain all the information in books up to that point and all online information. Would that be all the knowledge of humanity? Perhaps! There is no way of knowing if Google alone will be the digital repository of all human knowledge in 2040. The crucial point is there are likely to be digital databases in 2040 that, if integrated, represent the total of all human knowledge. Google may only be one of them. These databases can be stored in a computer’s memory. With early 2040 state-of-the-art software, a supercomputer in early 2040 will be able to access those databases and cognitively exceed the intelligence of the entire human race, which is by definition the point of the singularity.

Many contemporary futurists typically predict numerous details leading to the singularity and attempt to attach a timeframe to each detail. I have set that approach aside since it is not relevant to predicting the singularity. That includes, for example, predicting computer brain implants, nanotech-based manufacturing, as well as a laundry list of other technological marvels. However, I think the singularity will only require accurately predicting the three events delineated above. As simple as they appear, they satisfy two crucial requirements. One, they are necessary, and two, they are sufficient to predict the singularity.

In making the above predictions, I made one critical assumption. I assumed that humankind would continue the “status quo.” I am ruling out world-altering events, such as large asteroids striking Earth, leading to human extinction, or a nuclear exchange that renders civilization impossible. Is assuming the “status quo” reasonable? We’ll discuss that in the next post.

A circular image of the center of a building.

Predicting the Singularity

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Physics, ,

Futurists differ on the technical marvels and cultural changes that will precede the singularity. In this context, let us define the singularity as a point in time when an artificially intelligent machine exceeds the combined cognitive intelligence of the entire human race. In effect, there is no widely accepted vision of the decade leading to the singularity. There are reasons why this is the case.

The most obvious reason is that futurists differ on when the singularity will occur. Respected artificial intelligence technology futurists, like Ray Kurzweil and the late James Martin (1933 – 2013), predict the singularity will occur on or about 2045. At the 2012 Singularity Summit, Stuart Armstrong, a University of Oxford James Martin research fellow, conducted a poll regarding artificial generalized intelligence (AGI) predictions (i.e., the timing of the singularity) and found a median value of 2040. If you scour the Internet, you can find predictions that are substantially earlier and a century later. Therefore, let me preface everything I say with “caveat emptor,” Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” In this context, you may interpret it, “Let the reader be skeptical.” Although I strongly believe that my predictions regarding the singularity are correct, I also caution that the reader be skeptical and examine each prediction using their own judgment to ascertain its validity.

After much research and thought, I have concluded that the world will experience the singularity between 2040 -2045. In effect, I agree with Kurzweil, Martin, and the 2012 Armstrong survey. That suggests that the singularity will occur within the next twenty-five years. In the next post, I’ll explain how I arrived at my projection in the next post.

artificial intelligence equal to human intelligence

How Will We Know IF Artificial Intelligence Equals Human Intelligence?

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Technology, , ,

Today, we find many different opinions regarding what constitutes human intelligence. There is no one widely accepted answer. Here are two definitions that have found some acceptance among the scientific community.

  1. “A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings—‘catching on,’ ‘making sense of things,” or ‘figuring out’ what to do” (“Mainstream Science on Intelligence,” an editorial statement by fifty-two researchers, The Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994).
  2. “Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by thinking. Although these individual differences can be substantial, they are never entirely consistent: a given person’s intellectual performance will vary on different occasions, in different domains, as judged by different criteria. Concepts of ‘intelligence’ attempt to clarify and organize this complex set of phenomena. Although considerable clarity has been achieved in some areas, no such conceptualization has yet answered all the important questions, and none commands universal assent. Indeed, when two dozen prominent theorists were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen, somewhat different, definitions.” (“Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns,” a report published by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association, 1995).

Now that we have some basis for defining human intelligence, let us attempt to define a test that we could use to assert that artificial intelligence emulates human intelligence.

Alan Turing is widely considered the father of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence. He became prominent for his pivotal role in developing a computer that cracked the daily settings for the Enigma machine, Germany’s technology for coding messages during World War II. This breakthrough allowed the Allies to defeat the Nazis in many crucial engagements. Some credit Turing’s work, as a cryptanalyst, for shortening the war in Europe by as many as two to four years. After World War II, in 1950, Alan Turing turned his attention to artificial intelligence and proposed the now-famous Turing test. The Turing test is a methodology to test the intelligence of a computer. The Turing test requires a human “judge” to engage both a human and a computer with strong AI in a natural-language conversation. None of the participants, however, can see each other. If the judge cannot distinguish between the human and strong AI computer, the computer passes the Turing test and is equivalent to human intelligence. This test does not require that the answers be correct, just indistinguishable. Passing the Turing test requires almost all the major capabilities associated with strong AI to be equivalent to those of a human brain. It is a challenging test, and to date, no intelligent agent has passed it. However, over the years, there have been numerous attempts to pass the Turing Test, with associated claims of success. Here is a summary of major attempts to pass the Turing Test:

  • In 1966, Joseph Weizenbaum created the ELIZA program, which examined a user’s typed comments for keywords. If the program found a keyword, its algorithm used a rule to return a reply. Although Weizenbaum and others claim success, their claim is highly contentious. In effect, this is the same type of algorithm (i.e., a set of rules followed in problem-solving operations by a computer) early search engines used to provide search returns before Google’s use of “link popularity” (i.e., the number of links that point to a website using an imbedded keyword) to improve search return relevance.
  • In 1972, Kenneth Colby created PARRY, which was characterized as “ELIZA with attitude.” The PARRY program took the ELIZA algorithm and additionally modeled the behavior of a paranoid schizophrenic. Once again, the results were disappointing. It was not able to consistently convince professional psychiatrists that it was a real patient.
  • In 2015, the developers of a program called Eugene made a claim it passed the Turing Test. However, their claim turned out to be bogus. Eugene was able to convince 10 of 30 judges from the Royal Society that it was human. Although augmentative, there is a strong consensus based on the test conditions and results that Eugene did not pass the Turing test.

Although other tests claim to go beyond the Turing Test, no new test has gained wide support in the scientific community. Therefore, even today, the Turing Test remains the gold standard concerning an AI machine emulating human intelligence. Despite recent claims to the contrary, no AI machine has been able to pass the Turing Test.

AI is approaching human intelligence

Artificial Intelligence Is Approaching Human Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Technology, ,

According to Moore’s law, computer-processing power doubles every eighteen months. Using Moore’s law and simple mathematics suggest that in ten years, the processing power of our personal computers will be over a hundred times greater than the computers we currently are using. Military and consumer products using top-of-the-line computers running state-of-the-art AI software will likely exceed our desktop computer performance by factors of ten. In effect, artificial intelligence in top-of-the-line computers running state-of-the-art AI software will eventually be equivalent to and may actually exceed human intelligence.

Given the above, let us ask, “What should we expect from AI technology in ten years?” Here are some examples:

·       In military systems, expect autonomous weapons, including fighter drones, robotic Navy vessels, and robotic tanks.

·       In consumer products, expect personal computers that become digital assistants and even digital friends. Expect to be able to add “driverless” as an option to the car you buy. Expect productivity to increase by factors of ten in every human endeavor, as strong AI shoulders the “heavy lifting.”

·       In medical technology, expect surgical systems, like the da Vinci Surgical System, robotic platforms designed to expand the surgeon’s capabilities and offer a state-of-the-art minimally invasive option for major surgery, to become completely autonomous. Also, expect serious, if not life-threatening, technical issues as the new surgical systems are introduced, similar to the legal issues that plagued the da Vinci Surgical System, from 2012 through 2014. Expect prosthetic limbs to be directly connected to your brain via your nervous system and perform as well as the organic limb it replaced. Expect new pharmaceutical products that cure (not just treat) cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. Expect human life expectancy to increase by decades. Expect to see brain implants (i.e., technology that is implanted into the brain) become common, such as brain implants to rehabilitate stroke victims, by bypassing the damaged area of the brain.

·       On the world stage, expect cybercrime and cyber terrorism to become the number one issue that technologically advanced countries like the United States will have to fight. Expect significant changes in employment. When robots, embedded with strong AI computers can do the work currently performed by humans, it is not clear what type of work humans will do. Expect leisure to increase dramatically. Expect unemployment issues.       

The above examples are just the tip of a mile-long spear and highly likely to become realities. Most of what I cited is already off the drawing boards and being tested. AI is dramatically changing our lives already, and I project it will approach human intelligence in the next ten years. This is arguably optimistic. However, the majority of researchers project AI will be equivalent to human intelligence by mid-2021. Therefore, expect AI to be equivalent to human intelligence between 2030-2050.

Integrated Circuit

How Moore’s Law Ended the Second AI Winter

Artificial Intelligence, Categories, Technology, , ,

In our last post, I stated, “While AI as a field of research experienced funding surges and recessions, the infrastructure that ultimately fuels AI, integrated circuits, and computer software continued to follow Moore’s law. In the next post, we’ll discuss Moore’s law and its role in ending the second AI Winter.” This post will describe how Moore’s law ended the second AI Winter.

Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore was the first to note a peculiar trend: the number of components in integrated circuits had doubled every year from the 1958 invention of the integrated circuit until 1965. In 1970 Caltech professor, VLSI (i.e., Very-Large-Scale Integration) pioneer, and entrepreneur Carver Mead coined the term “Moore’s law,” referring to Gordon E. Moore’s observation, and the phrase caught on within the scientific community. In 1975, Moore revised his prediction regarding the number of components in integrated circuits doubling every year to doubling every two years. Intel executive David House noted that Moore’s latest prediction would cause computer performance to double every eighteen months due to the combination of more transistors and the transistors themselves becoming faster.

This means that while the research field of AI experienced surges and recessions, the fundamental building blocks of AI, namely integrated circuit computer components, continued their exponential growth. Even today, Moore’s law is still applicable. In fact, many semiconductor companies use Moore’s law to plan their long-term product offerings. There is a deeply held belief in the semiconductor industry that they must adhere to Moore’s law must remain competitive. In effect, it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In the strictest sense, Moore’s law is not a physical law of science. Rather, it delineates a trend or a general rule. This begs a question, “How long will Moore’s law continue to apply?” For approximately the last half-century, each estimate has predicted that Moore’s law would hold for another decade at various points in time. This has been occurring for almost five decades. I worked in the semiconductor industry for more than thirty years and over 20 years as a director of engineering for Honeywell’s Solid State Electronics Center, which developed and manufactured state-of-the-art integrated circuits for computers, missiles, and satellites. As a director of engineering, I was responsible for developing some of the world’s most sophisticated integrated circuits and sensors. During my over thirty years in the semiconductor industry, Moore’s law always appeared as if it would reach an impenetrable barrier. This, however, did not happen. New technologies constantly seemed to provide a stay of execution. We know that the trend may change at some point, but no one really has made a definitive case as to when this trend will end. The difficulty in predicting the end has to do with how one interprets Moore’s law. In my judgment, Moore’s law is not about integrated circuits, but rather it is an observation about human creativity as it relates to technology development. In fact, American author and Google’s director of engineering, Ray Kurzweil, showed via historical analysis that technological change is exponential. He termed this “The Law of Accelerating Returns” (Reference: The Age of Spiritual Machines, 1999, Ray Kurzweil).

As computer hardware and software continued its relentless exponential improvement, the AI field focused its development on “intelligent agents” or, as it often referred to, “smart agents.” The smart agent is a system that interacts with its environment and takes calculated actions to achieve its goal. Smart agents also can be combined to form multi-agent systems, with a hierarchical control system to bridge lower-level AI systems to higher-level AI systems. This became the game-changer. Using smart agents, AI technology has equal and exceed human intelligence in specific areas, such as playing chess. However, the current state of AI technology still falls short of general human intelligence, but this will change in the coming decades. We’ll discuss this further in the next post.