conversations.from: human
conversations.value: a title for a book about RKD, Talent, Management with the genre: Self-Help, Personal Transformation
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: A title for this book could be 'Artificial Intelligence'
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me a description for a book titled Artificial Intelligence about Artificial, Intelligence, However with the genre: Computers & Technology, Computer Science.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Artificial Intelligence is a somewhat dated introduction to the subject. If you are looking for an introduction to core topics in artificial intelligence (AI), such as logic, knowledge representation, and search, this book has something to offer. However, if you want to learn about some of the newer areas of AI, such as genetic algorithms, neural networks, and intelligent agents, you will wish to select a different text.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the first five paragraphs for this book.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Artificial Intelligence
  One major threat is technological unemployment. Many manual and low-level clerical jobs have disappeared. Others will follow (although manual jobs requiring dexterity and adaptability won't vanish). Most of the lifting, fetching, and carrying in a warehouse can now be done by robots. And driverless vehicles will mean jobless people.
  Middle-managerial positions are at risk also. Many professionals are already using AI systems as aids. It won't be long before jobs (in law and accountancy, for instance) involving time-consuming research into regulations and precedents can be largely taken over by AI. More demanding tasks, including many in medicine and science, will fairly soon be affected too. Jobs will be down-skilled, even if they're not lost. And professional training will suffer: how will the youngsters learn to make sensible judgements?
  New types of jobs will doubtless appear. But whether these will be equivalent in terms of numbers, educational accessibility, and/or breadwinning power (as happened after the Industrial Revolution) is doubtful. Serious sociopolitical challenges lie ahead.
  For instance, education is being opened up to personal and/or Internet-based AI aids—including MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) offering lectures by academic stars—that down-skill the jobs of many human teachers. Computer psychotherapists are already available, at much less expense than human therapists. (Some are surprisingly helpful—for recognizing depression, for instance.) However, they're entirely unregulated. And we saw in Chapter 3 that demographic change is encouraging research in the potentially lucrative area of artificial 'carers' for the elderly, as well as 'robot nannies'.
  Another worry concerns whether the companion should sometimes be silent, or tell a white lie. Relentless truth-telling (and sudden silences) might upset the user. But tactfulness would require hugely advanced NLP plus a subtle model of human psychology.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me four more paragraphs.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: They include the UK's Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) in Cambridge and Future of Humanity Institute (FHI) in Oxford, and the USA's Future of Life Institute (FLI) in Boston and Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) in Berkeley. These organizations are largely funded by AI philanthropists. For instance, CSER and FLI were co-founded by Jaan Tallinn, the co-developer of Skype. Both those institutions, besides communicating with AI professionals, are trying to alert policy-makers and other influential members of the public to the dangers.
  A similarly motivated, but larger, meeting (under Chatham House rules, and with no journalists present) was convened by FLI and CSER in Puerto Rico in January 2015. The organizer, Max Tegmark, had co-signed the minatory letter with Russell and Hawking six months earlier. Unsurprisingly, then, the atmosphere was noticeably more urgent than at Asilomar.
  Soon afterwards, a second open letter drafted by Tom Mitchell and several other leading researchers warned against developing autonomous weapons that would select and engage targets without human intervention. The signatories hoped to 'prevent a global AI arms race from starting'. Presented at AI's International Conference in July 2015, this was signed by nearly 3,000 AI scientists and by 17,000 people in related fields, and received extensive media coverage.
  The Puerto Rico meeting also led to an open letter (in June 2015) by MIT economists Erik Brynjolfsson and Andy McAfee. This was aimed at policy-makers, entrepreneurs, and businessmen, as well as at professional economists. Warning of the potentially radical economic implications of AI, they suggested some public policy recommendations that might ameliorate—though not cancel—the risks.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Add another sentence about Internet, Elon, Musk, resulted, funding, signed, circulated.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: They include the UK's Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) in Cambridge and Future of Humanity Institute (FHI) in Oxford, and the USA's Future of Life Institute (FLI) in Boston and Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) in Berkeley. These organizations are largely funded by AI philanthropists. For instance, CSER and FLI were co-founded by Jaan Tallinn, the co-developer of Skype. Both those institutions, besides communicating with AI professionals, are trying to alert policy-makers and other influential members of the public to the dangers. 
  A similarly motivated, but larger, meeting (under Chatham House rules, and with no journalists present) was convened by FLI and CSER in Puerto Rico in January 2015. The organizer, Max Tegmark, had co-signed the minatory letter with Russell and Hawking six months earlier. Unsurprisingly, then, the atmosphere was noticeably more urgent than at Asilomar. It immediately resulted in generous new funding (from the Internet millionaire Elon Musk) for research on AI safety and ethical AI—plus a cautionary open letter, signed by thousands of AI workers and widely circulated in the media. 
  Soon afterwards, a second open letter drafted by Tom Mitchell and several other leading researchers warned against developing autonomous weapons that would select and engage targets without human intervention. The signatories hoped to 'prevent a global AI arms race from starting'. Presented at AI's International Conference in July 2015, this was signed by nearly 3,000 AI scientists and by 17,000 people in related fields, and received extensive media coverage. 
  The Puerto Rico meeting also led to an open letter (in June 2015) by MIT economists Erik Brynjolfsson and Andy McAfee. This was aimed at policy-makers, entrepreneurs, and businessmen, as well as at professional economists. Warning of the potentially radical economic implications of AI, they suggested some public policy recommendations that might ameliorate—though not cancel—the risks.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the last five paragraphs.. Start with the sentence 'See also the paper by LeCun et al'.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: See also the paper by LeCun et al., and the two references from Demis Hassabis' team, cited under Chapter 2, earlier.
  This volume does not discuss technological AI, but shows how ideas from AI are influencing the study of the brain.
  The fourteen chapters (and five interviews with AI/A-Life pioneers) describe early work in AI and cybernetics.
  An account of the differences between symbolic AI and neural networks. Today's neural networks are much more complex than those discussed here, but the main points of comparison still stand.
  Statements and critiques of the transhumanist philosophy supported, and the transhumanist future predicted, by some AI visionaries.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the first two paragraphs for this book.. Start with the sentence 'Artificial Intelligence
  So while the potential benefits of AI are numerous—self-driving cars, efficient business processes, and even companionship in countless arenas—humanity will need to be particularly cautious when developing autonomous weapons systems and over-relying on AI technologies with sometimes inscrutable mechanisms'.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Artificial Intelligence
  So while the potential benefits of AI are numerous—self-driving cars, efficient business processes, and even companionship in countless arenas—humanity will need to be particularly cautious when developing autonomous weapons systems and over-relying on AI technologies with sometimes inscrutable mechanisms. For example, studies show the ease with which some AI (neural net) imaging systems can be "tricked" into misidentifying animals as rifles, or a picture of a plane as a dog, by altering images in ways that humans cannot perceive. If a terrorist can make a mall or a hospital look like a military target to a drone, the consequences could be dire. On the other hand, perhaps armed machines with appropriate sensors and rules of ethics could also reduce civilian casualties. Informed policy-making is needed to ensure that the potential dangers of AI entities do not overshadow their amazing benefits.
  Today, the applications of AI seem limitless, and billions of dollars are invested in the development of AI each year. As you will discover, such technologies have been used to decipher the Vatican's Secret Archives in an attempt to resolve the complicated handwritten texts in this huge historical collection. AI has also been used for predicting earthquakes, interpreting medical images and speech, and for predicting a person's time of death based on patient information in a hospital's electronic health records. AI has been deployed for generating jokes, mathematical theorems, US patents, games and puzzles, innovative designs for antennas, new paint colors, new fragrances, and more. Today, as many of us talk to our phones and other devices, our relationship with machines will continue to become even more intimate and humanlike in the future.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me five more paragraphs.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Face recognition systems attempt to identify people from images or video footage, often by comparing facial features (e.g., relative position of the eyes and nose) with those in an image database. Some modern systems use 3-D sensors to capture information and to increase accuracy when confronted with variations in lighting and viewing angles, and certain smartphones use infrared light to illuminate a user's face during the authentication process. Many challenges exist for accurate face recognition, such as when people are wearing accessories like hats and sunglasses, or even makeup, but today, in some circumstances, algorithms outperform humans in recognizing faces. The origin of face recognition "technology" could be traced to nineteenth-century England, where a regular system of prison photography was introduced in 1852, as a more humane method than branding, to keep track of prisoners and to share with other police departments when they escaped. One of the pioneers of more advanced face recognition was mathematician and computer scientist Woody Bledsoe (1921–1995), who worked on earlier forms of face recognition in 1964. At the time, he noted that the task was particularly difficult due to head rotation and tilt, lighting, facial expression, age, etc. Bledsoe and other early pioneers tended to rely on significant human collaboration with the computer, as humans manually extracted image facial coordinates from photos by hand using a graphics tablet (e.g., drawing pad).
  Over the years, face recognition systems have employed a variety of techniques, including eigenfaces, hidden Markov models, and dynamic link matching. As outlined by technologist Jesse Davis West, face recognition has several important applications today: "Law enforcement agencies are using face recognition to keep communities safer. Retailers are preventing crime and violence. Airports are improving travelers' convenience and security. And mobile phone companies are using face recognition to provide consumers with new layers of biometric security." Nevertheless, one may wonder if this could mark a worrisome turning point in civilization, when people are no longer able to go out in public and remain anonymous.
  In 1965, British mathematician Irving J. Good (1916–2009)—who worked as a cryptologist with fellow computer scientist Alan Turing—expressed concerns regarding a potential superhuman "intelligence explosion" in a paper titled "Speculations Concerning the First Ultraintelligent Machine." In the paper, Good writes: "Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an intelligence explosion, and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus, the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control."
  In other words, if humans built an AGI (i.e., artificial general intelligence that is not limited to a restricted field of knowledge and capability), it might be self-improving with engineering capabilities that allowed it to recursively redesign its hardware and software. As just one example configuration, perhaps such AGIs could use neural nets and evolutionary algorithms to build hundreds of separate modules that intercommunicate and collaborate with increasing sophistication, speed, and efficiency. Attempts to confine or isolate the potentially dangerous AI from the rest of the Internet might fail. Even if programmed with a beneficent goal and task, such as manufacturing better lightbulbs, what if it decided to convert the entire North American continent into a lightbulb manufacturing facility?
  Of course, there may be many reasons why such a superintelligence would be unlikely, such as the need to rely on slow humans and hardware networks. On the other hand, it is possible that an intelligence explosion would also immensely benefit humanity in the race to cure diseases and solve environmental problems. But what would be the sociological effects of superintelligent weapons—or even artificial companions that exhibited an intellect and (simulated) empathy that is greater than our human spouses?
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Delete the first sentence.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: g., relative position of the eyes and nose) with those in an image database. Some modern systems use 3-D sensors to capture information and to increase accuracy when confronted with variations in lighting and viewing angles, and certain smartphones use infrared light to illuminate a user's face during the authentication process. Many challenges exist for accurate face recognition, such as when people are wearing accessories like hats and sunglasses, or even makeup, but today, in some circumstances, algorithms outperform humans in recognizing faces. The origin of face recognition "technology" could be traced to nineteenth-century England, where a regular system of prison photography was introduced in 1852, as a more humane method than branding, to keep track of prisoners and to share with other police departments when they escaped. One of the pioneers of more advanced face recognition was mathematician and computer scientist Woody Bledsoe (1921–1995), who worked on earlier forms of face recognition in 1964. At the time, he noted that the task was particularly difficult due to head rotation and tilt, lighting, facial expression, age, etc. Bledsoe and other early pioneers tended to rely on significant human collaboration with the computer, as humans manually extracted image facial coordinates from photos by hand using a graphics tablet (e.g., drawing pad).
  Over the years, face recognition systems have employed a variety of techniques, including eigenfaces, hidden Markov models, and dynamic link matching. As outlined by technologist Jesse Davis West, face recognition has several important applications today: "Law enforcement agencies are using face recognition to keep communities safer. Retailers are preventing crime and violence. Airports are improving travelers' convenience and security. And mobile phone companies are using face recognition to provide consumers with new layers of biometric security." Nevertheless, one may wonder if this could mark a worrisome turning point in civilization, when people are no longer able to go out in public and remain anonymous.
  In 1965, British mathematician Irving J. Good (1916–2009)—who worked as a cryptologist with fellow computer scientist Alan Turing—expressed concerns regarding a potential superhuman "intelligence explosion" in a paper titled "Speculations Concerning the First Ultraintelligent Machine." In the paper, Good writes: "Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an intelligence explosion, and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus, the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control."
  In other words, if humans built an AGI (i.e., artificial general intelligence that is not limited to a restricted field of knowledge and capability), it might be self-improving with engineering capabilities that allowed it to recursively redesign its hardware and software. As just one example configuration, perhaps such AGIs could use neural nets and evolutionary algorithms to build hundreds of separate modules that intercommunicate and collaborate with increasing sophistication, speed, and efficiency. Attempts to confine or isolate the potentially dangerous AI from the rest of the Internet might fail. Even if programmed with a beneficent goal and task, such as manufacturing better lightbulbs, what if it decided to convert the entire North American continent into a lightbulb manufacturing facility?
  Of course, there may be many reasons why such a superintelligence would be unlikely, such as the need to rely on slow humans and hardware networks. On the other hand, it is possible that an intelligence explosion would also immensely benefit humanity in the race to cure diseases and solve environmental problems. But what would be the sociological effects of superintelligent weapons—or even artificial companions that exhibited an intellect and (simulated) empathy that is greater than our human spouses?
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the last four paragraphs.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: Wilks, Y., and R. Catizone, "Human-Computer Conversation," arXiv:cs/9906027, June 1999, <http://tinyurl.com/y7erxtxm>
  Webermay, B., "Swift and Slashing, Computer Topples Kasparov." May 12, 1997, <http://tinyurl.com/yckh6xko>
  It should be noted that AI researcher Eliezer Yudkowsky (b. 1979) has said that the paperclip maximizer idea may have originated with him. See the podcast "Waking Up with Sam Harris #116—AI: Racing Toward the Brink" (with Eliezer Yudkowsky).
  Brown, T., et al., "Adversarial Patch," 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Long Beach, CA, 2017.