A lawyer recently used ChatGPT in a court case, but it generated false citations. Can AI be trusted at all in the courtroom? Lawyer Richard Stevens explains how in legal cases, meaning, context, and nuance are essential, and can’t be “computed” by artificial intelligence. Additional Resources
Here is an excerpt of the transcript from a recent Mind Matters podcast episode, which you can listen to in full here. Lawyer and Walter Bradley Center Fellow Richard W. Stevens sat down with Robert J. Marks to discuss a Supreme Court Case regarding AI and copyright issues. Stevens helps us understand more of what the case is about and what’s at stake. For more on this, read about the court case’s conclusion here, as well as Marks’s commentary from Newsmax. Richard Stevens: So to boil this down, the situation was this. A woman by the name of Lynn Goldsmith, a professional photographer, took a photo of the musician named Prince. Later, Andy Warhol was paid to produce an orange Read More ›
What happens when ChatGPT doesn’t just generate false information but also slanderous and potentially harmful responses? And in legal matters, who is responsible for AI? Robert J. Marks and legal expert Richard W. Stevens discuss these topics and more in this week’s podcast episode. Additional Resources
Can generative AI “think outside the box” even as it draws from preexisting material on the internet? Are the images it produces protected under “fair use”? The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has decided “no.” AI fails to be “transformative,” meaning it can’t create new meaning apart from its source material. Robert J. Marks reported on the recent lawsuit Warhol v. Goldsmith, writing, Assume AI is trained with all of the musical compositions of Bach. If the AI generates music that sounds like Bach, it is not transformative. The “meaning or message” can be construed as being the same. It’s still like Bach. On the other hand, if the AI is trained only on Bach but generates music Read More ›
The question of copyright and “fair use” is a contentious debate in the age of AI. Is AI-generated art a kind of theft? What about artists’ rights? Attorney and Bradley Center Senior Fellow Richard Stevens discusses the legalities of copyright and the challenge of artificial intelligence in today’s increasingly complicated world. Additional Resources
Whenever I look at AI generated content, whether it be pictures or text, they all have the same flaw. The AI cannot comprehend what it is making. Let me explain. When we humans draw a picture, we are drawing a concept. We are drawing something like “cat climbs a tree” or “cowboy riding into the sunset”. It seems like this is what is happening with a picture drawing AI. We give it a prompt, and it draws an associated picture. On second thought, maybe not… When AI draws the picture, what is really going on is it is finding individual-colored pixels that correlate with the letters we typed in its massive database stored in the neural network. Very different than how we draw. We Read More ›
We’ve been highlighting a number of interviews from last year’s COSM conference, which attracted many of the most celebrated and respected engineers, scholars, and scientists from around the country. In today’s featured clip, George Montañez, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at Harvey Mudd College, shares his perspective on COSM 2022’s panel on artificial intelligence—areas of agreement and disagreement about the nature and future of artificial intelligence. Montañez, like Robert J. Marks, with whom he shared the panel, thinks AI is impressive and that we’ve made incredible strides in the field of computation, but maintains that these systems lack understanding and sentience. Blake Lemoine, the other panelist in the conversation, thinks AI is capable of a bit more than mere algorithmic Read More ›
[The AI hype isn’t new. The history of exaggerating its potential goes back decades. In this article, Robert J. Marks echoes many of the views covered in more detail in his 2022 book Non-Computable You: What You Do That Artificial Intelligence Never Will. Today we share it with you, originally written on October 3rd, 2017, and published at The Stream.] A.I. is transforming our world. Should we worry about that? Entrepreneur billionaire Elon Musk is worried. Woody Allen once said, “What if everything is an illusion and nothing exists? In that case, I definitely overpaid for my carpet.” Musk thinks he overpaid for his carpet. He believes there’s a good chance the world as we know it is a sophisticated Read More ›
In a recent Mind Matters podcast, computer engineer Robert J. Marks puts the AI hype into perspective by investigating what it can and cannot do. Marks is of the mind that AI can offer a myriad of benefits to the modern world, and notes that the technology has already made inroads into various spheres of life including banking, accounting, and facial recognition technology. The danger lies in believing that AI can replicate human creativity and understanding. While AI can do a lot, it can never understand itself the way human beings can. Marks thinks this is essential to keep in mind. We are not machines. Here is a quote from the episode in which Marks sets some terms and definitions: Read More ›
Will AI ever reach a point where it can independently analyze, think, and transcend itself? Furthermore, will it ever become sentient? Some experts in the field, like Blake Lemoine, think AI has already breached the boundaries of sentience. Others, though, remain skeptical. A new article from The Conversation discusses ChatGPT, the Turing test, and the question of consciousness. For Turing, “thinking” meant simply passing the test, but his assumptions were misguided. Philip Goff writes, Turing was wrong, however, when he said the only clear notion of “understanding” is the purely behavioural one of passing his test. Although this way of thinking now dominates cognitive science, there is also a clear, everyday notion of “understanding” that’s tied to consciousness. To understand Read More ›
What was the precursor for the widespread tech addiction we see today, particularly in young people? Many say it was the iPhone. Peter Tonguette, however, thinks that the game Tetris started the screentime avalanche. Tonguette reviewed the new Apple TV+ film Tetris, which covers the story of the classic game’s development, acquisition, and subsequent popularity in the early nineties. He writes, One might assume this changeover coincided with the rise of smartphones and social media, but a new movie shows that it happened as early as the summer vacation of 1989. During that fateful interregnum between school years, kids were introduced to something that prefigured the electronic devices of the 21st century: a battery-powered, 8-bit handheld videogame device whose two Read More ›
By Tom Gilson Richard Stevens’ May 11 Stream article, “AI Legal Theories,” suggests we consider making Artificial Intelligence companies legally responsible for the harms they cause. We do that already with consumer products, so in principle it should be possible to do the same with AI. Enforcement would be by civil law. Injured parties would presumably be given standing to sue the source of the harm without having to prove negligence. That gets us somewhere, but not far enough. It settles the question of who is legally responsible. But responsible for what? Specifically, what will we call harm? Who will decide? Based on what standard of wisdom? Stevens gives this example of harm, citing an earlier Stream article by Robert J. Marks: “The Snapchat ChatGPT-powered Read More ›
Artificial intelligence already surrounds us and has made inroads into banking, accounting, and digital technology. It’s ubiquitous. In today’s episode, Robert J. Marks reminds us that AI is like fire: its benefits and value depend on how wisely (or foolishly) we use it. Additional Resources
From May 9-30, the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute is running a film festival on YouTube to highlight some of its top videos. We’ll be highlighting different videos throughout the month. Today we are screening the most recent video from our popular series Science Uprising which delves into the topic of artificial intelligence, featuring John Lennox and Robert J. Marks:
In a recent Mind Matters podcast episode, host Robert J. Marks spoke with Kent Marks, former Boy Scout guide who now works with Trail Life USA. In the wake of Boy Scouts’ precipitous decline over the last decade, Trail Life offers boys the chance to get outside and go on wilderness adventures. This is a huge opportunity to help young men get off the screens and into the beauty of creation. Speaking about the gravity of the problem, Robert said, The impact of social media has just been terrible. Teenage suicides are up, depression rates are up. I think a third of all girls involved in social media have body image problems. And that’s terrible. These are the symptoms of Read More ›
George Gilder is optimistic about AI’s potential contributions to economic flourishing, but he’s nonetheless staunch on the point that it can never be creative. Echoing the sentiments of Robert J. Marks, who argued this in his book Non-Computable You: What You Do That Artificial Intelligence Never Will, Gilder thinks that while AI can be a helpful tool in a number of sectors, it can’t think. Hence the title of his 2020 book: Gaming AI: Why AI Can’t Think but Can Transform Jobs. In the Silicon Valley piece by Vish Gain, Gilder’s views are aptly quoted: The threat of AI to me is that people worship it and defer to it. They think that their perception is not relevant anymore in Read More ›
In a recent article, Professor Robert J. Marks reported how artificial intelligence (AI) systems had made false reports or gave dangerous advice: Prof. Marks suggested that instead of having government grow even bigger trying to “regulate” AI systems such as ChatGPT: How about, instead, a simple law that makes companies that release AI responsible for what their AI does? Doing so will open the way for both criminal and civil lawsuits. Strict Liability for AI-Caused Harms Prof. Marks has a point. Making AI-producing companies responsible for their software’s actions is feasible using two existing legal ideas. The best known such concept is strict liability. Under general American law, strict liability exists when a defendant is liable for committing an action Read More ›
Can ChatGPT write funny jokes? The answer is yes. To try and generate some short jokes, I went to ChatGPT and started all my queries with: “Complete the following to make it funny:” Doing so alerts ChatGPT about my end goal. Without this preamble, I could make queries all day and get no funny responses. I started with the beginnings of some well-known quotes. To Be or Not to Be Consider for example the quote from Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “To be or not to be, that is the question.” I instructed ChatGPT with the following command: “Complete the following to make it funny: To be or not to be…” One of the better responses I got was “To be or Read More ›
The Boy Scouts of America once enjoyed a booming membership. But over the last decade especially, due to some policy changes, abuse scandals, and a giant lawsuit, the once great organization has seen a colossal decline. In last week’s podcast, Robert J. Marks sat down with former Boy Scout leader and his cousin Kent Marks. Together they talked about the tragic decline in the Boy Scouts program, which coincides with the enduring need to help boys navigate the many distractions and difficulties of growing up in a digitally mediated world. Today, Kent continues to lead boys on wilderness expeditions and believes that getting guys away from the screens and into the beauty of the outdoors is a key to their Read More ›
The tech optimism talk just got a little more bizarre from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Altman is confident that artificial intelligence is going to better our world in countless ways; sometimes, however, he doesn’t specify just how that’s going to happen. Other days it seems like he’s actually on the doomsday train. Which is it? Is AI going to save us and pilot us into a transhumanist eternity or will it enslave us forever and diminish everything that makes us human? Maybe it’s both at this point! Maggie Harrison writes in a new blog at Futurism, It’s true that AGI could, in theory, give humans a helping hand in curing some of our ills. But such an AGI, and AGI Read More ›