Monday, December 28, 2015

Good Nazi

In the WSJ, book reviews, Sat, 12/26/2015, Adam Tooze reviews Martin Kitchen's Speer: Hitler's Architect (see "The Myth of the Good Nazi").

This image comes from that review.

Comment about Hitler's best and brightest,
namely, their processes and foci
To quote: they "lived and died by the standard of performance" and considered little "ethical examination of the methods" being used. Now, of course, Speer was tried and made an effort to show his activities in a good light.

Too, progress comes from focused effort. Yet, that bit of text struck me as being very applicable to STEM's shortcomings which I call everyone having their heads in STEM sand.

No, this is not a view from loosey-goosey space. Take all of the hype about AI taking over. Of course, it's the best-and-brightests who are pushing the state of the art. Some observers are saying, wit a minute, perhaps. Yet, that is only one of many technological moments which on a close look are very much deleterious to those involved, especially the workers. The buyers only their souls to worry about.

Question: Does STEM-ness obviate ethical issues? Why the STEM thrust as if we have no other ways to look at truth?

Remarks:  Modified: 12/28/2015

12/28/2015 --

Thursday, December 17, 2015

AI and commonality

Of late, there were a lot of bucks put into coordinating AI.

Let's hope that Asimov's little robot rules are remembered and extended out as they ought to be. Say what?

Yes, human intelligence trumps the artificial. Again, say what?

Well, the team will be incomplete without someone talking to them from a real position. I understand that they are SV heavy hitters. Are not those who have been entrapping us all?

So, we'll be weighing in more here. Still doing Quora (going on 5 months).

Remarks:  Modified: 12/17/2015

12/17/2015 --