Caca de Vaca

The so-called computer “revolution” began shortly after World War Two, engendered in no small part by the work of British mathematicians at Blechley Park in England during that unfortunate time. That, in turn, was driven for the most part by the heroic efforts to decrypt encoded message traffic within the German military structure using the famous Enigma machine developed in Holland earlier. Yet, ideas about machines capable of mimicking certain human characteristics, such as solving math problems, maintaining number accounts and so on, are evident in the histories of ancient peoples such as the Sumerians, Greeks, Arabs and others. To be sure, modern high-speed electronic computers satisfy much or all of these desires

The beginning of the revolution was mostly confined to physically large, relatively slow machines taken against modern computing speeds, that tended to focus their use with scientific, military and banking problems. Since that time, computers are more than strictly computers, per se, solving arcane complex problems. They are now merged with telephones, cameras and body sensors, as well as data-transfer, storage devices and video displays. Since the beginning, however, computers, regardless of their tasks, would not have been complete; i.e., able to function so as to present the desired results, without so-called “algorithms.” The word is traceable to ancient Central Asia, an Arab mathematician and important, survival-critical irrigation projects. Algorithms are an essential part of computer design, function and the programming thereof. In simple terms, many algorithmic computations depend upon the simple software command structure such as “If, then, else.” Further, this means to test a proposition or a condition and act upon the result. It follows that complex algorithmic command sets would be linked sequentially or in a network in order to reach a conclusion or result, whether desired or not. This might appear as follows: If rain, then umbrella, else If sun, then hat, else If cold, then jacket, else If high wind, and so on.

Such software routines are ubiquitous in computer software language, whether in a program used in a large scientific research computer in a government laboratory or in a so-called “smart phone” carried in a pocket. Computing would be highly restricted without such software language. Most problems or control modes, simple or complex, are generally subjected to such logic routines.

There is a humorous admonition in some circles, often amongst technical folk with awareness of the theory and operation of machines, whether mechanical, electrical or other. It reads, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” This writer has a personal acquaintance with such a saying, having to do with rocket fire control radar sets on USAF fighter-interceptor aircraft and concerned, affected pilots thereof.

There are examples of this no-no and the results when not heeded. It rears its ugly head all the way from such areas as automobile design and manufacture to computer programs such as client email and Internet browsers. Much, if not all, of this tendency derives from the need to maintain the activity of those who either originated the thing that has been changed to its detriment, and/or oversee its continuing use and viability. Some of these people are termed “Geeks;” those who inhabit closed, secretive areas with doors that feature a slot for food and drink on a periodic basis.

These same people have taken the now old technology and science, if you will, to change the term for complex algorithm sets to “AI,”or “Artificial Intelligence” in more and more areas of computer application. A serious error which they and the rest of humanity will live to regret, especially should they attempt to design and build a fully grown so-called “Humanoid” version. Quite possible, but quite improbable.

Humans, or speaking from the scientific corner of the room, classified as Family sapiens of Genus homo, are, it would seem, unique amongst earth-bound animals. Unique, in that we have large brains, control fire, employ the wheel in many configurations, use complex language, prognosticate and remember stuff, both “good” and “bad.” The collective experiences of each and every one of us goes to make up the sum of our parts. In our daily pursuits, we may not remember specific events in the moment, as it were, with some specificity and clarity, but the way in which we act and react to waking and sleeping moments and events is colored to some degree by our collective experiences. The collection of our experiences makes us who we are. A woman my recall either awake or in a dream, a doll given to her by a favorite, loving aunt. Perhaps she possesses the doll still. Perhaps the doll was lost or destroyed in some way, resulting in lasting trauma. A man may have had a wonderful baseball mitt, and/or a special German Shepard dog. Experiences such as these lie in wait in the brain, and serve to make up the attitudes, the visions, the decisions one makes in large and small occurrences throughout life. They are not overt; rather covert, but linger and flavor the personality.

So, when the assignment is handed to the Geeks who are to manufacture a “human-like AI android bot,” who should they pick to represent, say, a boy, or male humanoid? Perhaps an AI creature with some level of altruism, sympathy, empathy or the opposite; the lack thereof. Let’s see; hm. There are plenty of choices from which to pick. How about a Zulu warrior? No? Brooklyn Jew? Fourteen year-old Tibetan mountain animal herder? Norse fisherman?

The point which should be obvious here is that in order to replicate a human of either sex or age, much information must be supplied and available in order for the algorithmic sets to form a human personality for the bot to replicate to any degree of reality. If an insurance company female AI device is responsible for deciding whether a six year-old girl should have cancer treatment or not, did the AI agent “decider” love a doll given to her by a favorite aunt? Is the question and the answer fraught with minutia relative to personal trauma or feelings of sympathy if not empathy on the part of the algorithm? Or is the answer the result of an esoteric equation based upon survival figures?

Humans have been classified as social animals, meaning that we fare best when cooperative in a group setting. That has led our development to the point where we recognize in each other’s subtle signs, or indicators, as to mood or true meaning. The slant of the head, set of the mouth, direction and movement of the eyes, body posture. We read such indicators without thinking, and tend to be offset or unsure when these signs are absent. Even the quality and tone of a voice heard over a telephone carries information as to the sincerity or duplicity of the speaker.

Such important trivia – should it even be available to some degree of accuracy – and the resulting data storage and algorithmic overload would require data server farms the size of Tennessee and speeds of electrons in copper beyond reason.

Possible, yes; probable, no.

Give the Geeks in the basement something else to do, good food and drink, then refer to the title of this piece..