Skip to main content

tv   George Gilder Gaming AI  CSPAN  November 15, 2021 12:01am-1:02am EST

12:01 am
by denise harper. next is georgetown university sociology professor michael eric dyson examination of the role of race in america in entertaining race. wrapping up our look at some of source booksellers best-selling nonfiction books is the dead are arising, a recount of the life of malcolm x. some of these authors have appeared on book tv and you can watch them any time at >> some people say artificial intelligence will make the human race obsolete and a lot of people don't really want to think about a guy artificial intelligence as is kind of intimidating subject but the thing about ai is even if you don't want to think about it, it's thinking about you or is it? well, that's the kind of question we will discuss today on this episode of independent conversations. greetings to everyone who is
12:02 am
joining us. i'm graham walker. we tried to bring notable experts on a variety of topics to discuss topics of the day and we think giving you the perspective that you aren't likely to hear elsewhere and today we will be talking with george gilder. let me welcome. i think it was deep in the winter in january, 1982 and you had recently published wealth and poverty like the year before. wasn't published in 1981?
12:03 am
before publication before it came out. it was a fabulous book-- your creativity and others about the system of free exchange so called capitalism when you analogized it to what was the exchange thing among the native american tribes? >> [inaudible] >> tried to get together and it was simply give and share, which was fascinating and you pointed out there's a lot of that and what we call capitalism, which therefore is simply on self interest, but rather at least a cane to benevolence.
12:04 am
that was an eye-opener, george. thank you. >> i enjoyed writing wealth and poverty and i have been doing a number of things. my technology book really sprang from wealth and poverty which focused on creativity. since then i have been working on the information theory. >> i remember. i was trying to think of it a moment ago, i think you described it as a potlatch. >> the potlatch. >> that was really amazing and it helped me because i was a college's student at the time or just after and i was having tussles with my peers and professors who all thought socialism was the coolest thing there ever was and they usually
12:05 am
put capitalism in distorted terms and you gave me a whole new category. that was great. people say you are an economist but sometimes you think you-- you seem like you are a social logistics as you wrote men and marriage and other people say you are a technologist and a future spirit what are you? >> i'm a historian. [laughter] [inaudible] i'm willing to play the role imposed on me. >> well, we are glad. >> i really probably believe in hierarchy universe and it's helpful to have a philosophical perspective that unifies all
12:06 am
these different fields and that allows you the analysis. [inaudible] different expressions that even exacerbate. [inaudible] >> your work has always been-- i think that probably must have driven you to be the cofounders of the discovering institute in seattle. they seem to have quite a synthetic understanding of the science. is that right. >> that's what we try to do. we try to bring the scientists together and economics is just another part of the biology.
12:07 am
a cosmic vision-- [inaudible] speaking on artificial intelligence and bob metcalf of metcalfe's law is going to be expounding on the significance of crypto currency and other such cause owns, psychological events. exciting time. newt gingrich on china. i don't think war with china brings any benefits i can imagine. >> i agree with you on that.
12:08 am
that could be less productive. if our viewers want information about the conference, where should they go, george? >> calls him .-dot technology. cause him .-dot technology. cause him cosm .-dot technology. cosm .-dot technology november 12. >> in the meanwhile you are releasing a brand-new book, i think the publication date is officially october 15 if i'm not mistaken, but the title-- is the cover of it. "gaming ai" very nice and compelling cover.
12:09 am
i also noticed if you want to go to amazon you can order it already. they have some in stock, it seems like. >> it's been out for a while. >> that's why they have some in stock. let's talk about the book, i mean, i got a copy of it and i was utterly fascinated by the way you take up the standard challenge and kind of turn it in a direction that people don't expect them in the standard challenge, i mean, you mentioned in the book that some people think ai will be sure the motion of the human race and i think i'm 20 of the book it's a very arresting quote where you quoted the late stephen hawking who pronounced the development of artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race. >> elon musk says that ai--
12:10 am
[inaudible] >> yeah. >> a lot of people talk about-- predicted way back. [inaudible] he said once we have artificial intelligence that will be the last invention we will ever have to make because our true artificial intelligence would be capable of creating those that can outperform the original artificial intelligence and that's when we said cascade of intelligence through the
12:11 am
universe. >> the theory was it was culminating in the so-called singularity which i think is supposed to be rare and basically the artificial intelligence takes up where we left off and says goodbye to us; right? >> that's truly what he was predicting. a lot of people have developed the idea further. a friend of mine. >> i thought he was just silicon valley. >> now-- no, technology chief at google and it developed ai the response to gmail.
12:12 am
responses that allow you to anticipate how you are going to respond to it. >> i noticed the responses have been getting more courteous and more specific. i suppose it's due to his development. >> that's his contribution. really i think all these people forgotten the fundamental principles of computer science. >> that's what's striking about this book because you don't seem to be as much as a doomsday or as some. in fact, you seem to think the potential of ai may be oversold, but that even in the overselling there could be some collateral damage and you are trying to avoid that. have i got that right?
12:13 am
>> yeah, i think that's right. the idea that somehow ai competes with human minds is a fundamental illusion. >> a lot of these technology creators came to the work having already observed the idea that the human mind is nothing more than a neat machine and so if they knew that quote unquote knew that to begin with and it's not surprising that the conception of artificial intelligence could be the singularity think that totally transcends the human mind because the human mind was never anything more than meat and electrons to begin with then you could surpass it, but i think your point about the history of technology is the human mind demonstrates that it must be more than just meet and electrons. >> when i was writing about the
12:14 am
internet in the late '80s on through its development in the launch around the globe-- [inaudible] is a way of mapping all the connections of the global internet and a couple of years ago take about-- [inaudible] you map all of the connections in the global internet-- >> remind me? >> 210, essentially.
12:15 am
recently, mit campaigned and have been trying to map all of the connections in the human brain and this has been really difficult. >> how many does that take? >> that's the question here. a friend of mine that first developed dna codes and imagine that dna was a code and what the code would be and he's been mapping for some 20 years.
12:16 am
at thanksgiving dinner the other year-- last year, he told me that the more he studies the connect dome of the warm the less he understands the brain, but the folks at mit have taken his estimates and connections and that emma toad warm. [inaudible] exons and neurons and connections of all kinds and it turns out it takes a lot to can map the connections in the human brain. a single human brain is exactly
12:17 am
as complex as the whole global internet is. the global internet takes gigawatts of energy. a data center takes a glacier to deal with he problems, i mean, generally the chief and dominant technology of a data center is the cooling system to take away the heat that these machines admit-- emit. single human brain functions with 12 to 14 watts. >> i met 98.6 degrees fahrenheit
12:18 am
>> and so i believe that technology functions to augment and extend human capabilities rather than attempting to compete with human capabilities let alone-- i think companies in silicon valley that regard the business plan are contributors and will fail. >> that's how they approach it then they will make themselves superfluous. in fact they seem to anticipate that so if you proceed in business on the assumption that your job is to make your own customers sophistical list you will run out of things to do if that's your business model large to? >> to not believe i think
12:19 am
technology is continuing to advance at a tremendous pace. i don't think it's advancing anymore rapidly than had been at the time of the industrial revolution and i think that no economists-- [inaudible] there is a study of the advance of writing. the amount of humans you need to light a room at night and he shows the advance in lighting is that 100,000 times more rapid
12:20 am
than is measured in the economic bottle so essentially economists while they were writing about dark satanic mills. >> william blake. >> yeah, the various machines-- images. the incredible extension of light from the time it was-- to the millions of candles-- [inaudible] finally electricity, whatever it was, but measured by the amount of time a worker had to spend to
12:21 am
illuminate a room, economic progress was 100,000 times more rapid than images estimated in that field, so we were missing industrial revolution missed light and i think in this, and current ai revolution we are missing mind. >> that's fascinating. >> and measured by the number of hours it takes a worker to earn the money to purchase the goods and services. this continues to be capitalism
12:22 am
with technological progress as fast as ever and with increasing quality because poor people benefit more from the expansion to do other things than rich people already's been there a few minutes to earn food and clothing in whatever, so as technology advances it benefits the masses most and ai is just the newest manifestation of the advances in the computer industry.
12:23 am
[inaudible] who was probably a paramount figure and anticipated the gigahertz that we have today and he really was the first person to imagine that we could really produce thinking machines that operated billions of cycles a second. >> let me step back. something you said really deserves i think extra attention. you commented the moment ago that technological and economic advance tends to have a comparatively greater impact of benefits who-- to the worse off because the worse off have bothered to go up and so the comparative improvement in their life can be greater. that's intriguing.
12:24 am
two years ago i was in africa in uganda traveling around some of the rural areas in that part of uganda and it was striking to me , of course, the standard of living obviously lower than the united states and i saw many people living in huts, no sufficient clothing, not having sufficient covering from the rain, people clearly struggling. although there was a lot of economic activity and at the same time every single person sitting under every insufficiently corrugated tin roof on every little shop on every little byway or alleyway had a cell phone. every single person had a cell phone. >> a smart phone. a supercomputer. that means my estimation of the real standard of living,.
12:25 am
[inaudible] it's another form of the expansion of light. >> i notice that ugandan roads were still pretty bad and needed to be repaved, but at the same time i realized everyone can now talk to their grandma or great grandma out in the back country anytime they want because everyone even in the small villages have a cell phone and they are using the smart phones as a median of payment and exchange simplifying moderate-- monetary transactions and it's quite stunning. made me proud to be a northern californian. >> you are correct to be proud and it's really what's bizarre is the argument you see a lot of places that the middle class is suffering.
12:26 am
stagnation of technology and whatever is the cry of the moment that inequality is vastly expanded. you know, a few thousand dollars takes care of all of your essential needs and you live like-- you live a lot better than a king if you have that smart phone with access to medical care that it implies and ultimately access to a whole civilization and so rich people
12:27 am
and so-called wealth is really knowledge. it's invested, it's not liquid. they liquidated and it disappears and capitalism you get to keep what you give away because unless your wealth is invested in working providing jobs and opportunities for others it loses value and ultimately disappears, so this is really a fundamental principle of capitalism and its manifested today and phenomenal creativity that you saw in uganda. >> we have a number of people on with us, george, simultaneously
12:28 am
although we may also share the recording later but one of the current participants sent a note and commenting that an organization or company called stelara technology in san jose is a good example of the kind of thing you are talking about. do you know solera technologies by any chance? >> yeah. i've heard-- i'm trying to-- [inaudible] more formidable accomplishment, its integration of ai and machine learning capabilities on a single ship. trillions of transitions on a
12:29 am
single wafer. somehow i can't remember what the heck stelara does. >> something good, apparently. >> they should tell you if they are going to talk about it. have the guy tell us which company that is. >> i'm watching the comment box. we will see. one of the great arguments in the book, "gaming ai", is your point that those in the high-tech industry who are well obsessed, maybe our may be captivated is a nicer word with this idea of moving towards the singularity where the created intelligence surpasses human mind and so forth and makes the human mind obsolete, they seem, you argue, that they have forgotten it history of their own industry. >> that's right. >> can you tell me something about that.
12:30 am
it self it illustrates your point about the need for the creativity of the human mind. can you tell me something about that? >> a great figure who imagined that you could make mathematics completely self-sufficient. his agenda is a young man was to render mathematics a completely self-sufficient and complete coherent system and he met this young man named kirk godel who i believed was the-- [inaudible]
12:31 am
kirk, 1951, i believe had connie's berg introduced a paper that showed that mathematics was intricately-- entrance will be dependent on propositions that couldn't be proven within the system itself. >> self-contained system. >> could not be a self-contained system. and john who was the greatest mind in my judgment produced over the last couple of centuries by knowing that immediately concluded from this he was the only one who really understood the paper and he not only saw that this meant that thinking machines would always be necessary dependent on
12:32 am
outside programmers, oracles and when they asked alan who was the inventor of the universal computer architecture. [inaudible] he said the one thing i can tell you about the oracle is that it can't be a machine. is the computer architecture that still owns most of our systems, but the new architecture is a massively parallel really originating with graphics, processes and has currently taken over the data centers and it was also embedded
12:33 am
by gnomon. [inaudible] >> he understood the artificial intelligence could not compete with the human mind. it was the necessary expression of the capabilities of human minds that extended into the world. >> right. it's actually an extension, not a replacement. well, what you said a moment ago really is a way of capturing it. tell me again who it was who made the point that all of this developed machine intelligence would have to have a human mind as if it were an oracle. who said the oracle business? >> alan turing. >> okay. it's a very striking metaphor
12:34 am
because it means that to put it may be into simple but historical terms, we are machine intelligence. what the oracle of delphi was thought to be was the man of antiquity and other words a form of knowledge mysteriously outside the realm of grasping, so you would go to the oracle and see and you know it was probably a bunch of hooey, but they would go there and they thought were receiving insight which they couldn't possibly get from inside a human mind so that human mind to the artificial intelligence the way the oracle was to humans of that day. that's a fascinating metaphor. >> and this is ultimately is an extension of charles sanders
12:35 am
opposition that all inclination is triadic. it can be binary. if it's binary it's restricted to thimble systems. there is no necessary connection between symbols and mathematics and objects such as objects of both worlds and in order to connect a symbol system to the real world you need in the mediating mind, human conscious, human brain. >> it sort of like two dimensions versus three dimensions. >> that's right. >> exactly and we have a society prevailing in silicon valley. they imagine binary symbol which
12:36 am
can play games a lot better than us because they have the symbol system and so on the go board black and gray, white and gray stones and those stones are symbols-- they don't point beyond the board. if the computer can move those stones billions of times faster than a human can obviously they can play better than a human just as crushing machine-- >> your point i think is that a man would be superseded by a threshing machine. a man with a single side doesn't mean the machine is more sophisticated than the man. >> that's right. >> well, so you say early on in the book and you repeated a few
12:37 am
different places that there are two basic claims that this notion of sort of supremacy of artificial intelligence, you say it's both dumb and self-defeating, so we have been dealing with the dumb part and i find it reassuring to learn from you and your book and other sources that the human mind actually is more complex than maybe the entire world. that's reassuring. i'm glad to know maybe there is some evidence my mind is more than just a meat machine with some electrons pulsing through it, but that's reassuring so maybe it's a dumb, but the trouble is could this huge or this view of artificial intelligence rising to a supremacy over everything, could it be self-defeating? i get it's mistaken, but how can be self-defeating? what could it undermine to think about it the way these guys are thinking about it? >> because they try to replace
12:38 am
their customers in the necessary compliments, i mean, it's computer technology that they are creating, which is an expression of their genius and human imagination and ability to have counterfactual projections and to imagine what doesn't already exist or is not already in the program. >> the human part. >> yeah, the human part. you know, everyone, decades ago -- i was introduced to a doctor who invented a diagnostic machine using mainframe or may
12:39 am
be a digital minicomputer, i don't know, but the idea was that and actually the machine artificial intelligence would excel all human diagnostic-- once the symbols are prepared, once you saw all of the inputs of the machine and get them all categorized correctly then an algorithm can function as billions of cycles a second and produce an answer, but much of the intelligences mediation between the textures of the real world and the symbols within the
12:40 am
machine and we now have the illusion of quantum computer. i wrote a book about quantum computer. >> you did. what was the title? >> microcosm and that was published in 1990 like 89-- 1989 and microcosm was economics and technology and of course the whole semi conductor industry which microcosm described in its history was based on manipulating matters from the inside in accordance with quantum principles and so all technology, all computer technology is based on quantum
12:41 am
physics. quantum six is the theory of the microcosm, the nano cause him whatever and the problem and the problem is connecting this system to the real world. now, what the-- what they call quantum computer does is abandon the binary on off logic that has been the salvation of computers. [inaudible] analog systems and so quantum computing is really an turn the analog computer and analog
12:42 am
computing was displaced by digital computing not because analog computing wasn't faster and more capacious and didn't correspond more closely with the real world, but because an analog computing making a model analog model of the world takes endless materials, mapping of the real territories and textures of the actual existence onto the computer and so analog computing, quantum computing is terrific, but it imposes the whole burden on the human mind
12:43 am
that program it. the problem into the analog realm where it incurs all complexities and uncertainties and schrödinger's cat that populate the quantum world. >> so the human mind, again, layman's terms, the human mind can't sort of set up closed systems which can then may be run artificially better than the human brain could run them, but with that system can't do is imagine and create systems that are outside of the system and the human mind seems to be able to radically transcend closed systems of meaning and introduce new angles and that's what generates the creativity and if those people in charge of these
12:44 am
deprecate's the role of human mind and creativity they may end up putting their own enterprise on the road to-- well, if not failure or at least less creativity. is that right? >> beautifully stated. i think that creativity always comes as a surprise to us. >> now, i hope your colleagues in this industry over across the bay here in silicon valley which is not far from where we are at the independent institute, the other side of san francisco bay, i hope they pay attention to you because if not and if you are right it might be they will be overtaken in creativity because they will be deprecating the very qualities that made their own business work which it seems like it would be a terrible shame. they should pay attention to george gilder.
12:45 am
>> one thing they can pay attention to the history of their own industry. >> there you go. >> pay attention to the hierarchy of the universe, the human mind is a product of random fluctuation of molecules, delusion to begin with and the human mind is a product of random evolutionary forces that really-- makes them think they can duplicate the mind with the machine, but the mind is almost infinitely more complex than the
12:46 am
machines that they are building even today. >> those of us and who some ways are friends of the creative technological enterprise, we would encourage our colleagues as they were in creativity not to underestimate their own mind by buying into this ridiculously idea that the mind is a random set of physical mechanics. >> life after google. >> this is your immediate-- life after google, i highly recommend it which is related to this new "gaming ai". i'm going to take you somewhere unexpected probably because i'm looking at messages from our viewers. following on what i just said about you know what you said about the effects of this belief really, this faith that the mind
12:47 am
is nothing other than axonal material, mechanical and physical, so this person said the simplest of mind and person is still more complex than the entire internet system and is kind of hard to say there is no god. that's what this person says and i think that's a good point, but i have another point that's a little different which is, let me try this on you, george. when i was reading your book it struck me that there is always-- always has been in this civilization something if not always opposition between a mindset which is empirical in nature and a mindset which is a spiritual and pious in nature and so that's why people say religion and science have been in each other's way. there's something to that, but what i see now based on your analysis is that there's a new spiritual or devotional attitude about the singularity which may
12:48 am
itself form a new opposition to science and religion, religion now being the religion of singularity which is getting in the way of the actual scientific attitude of creativity, so this is a replay in a really unexpected form of an old opposition or is it? i'm thinking it's a replay of an old opposition, but the roles are reversed because the people who are all gaga over the power of ai to take over everything in the form of singularity are so committed to their faith position that they seem to close off the ability to be receptive to other data and you are bringing other data in. you are the scientists-- >> one of the inventors of virtual reality did the first virtual reality machine with the number of good books on the subject and he says ai makes you
12:49 am
stupid essentially. >> that's your point. very intriguing. okay. here's another comment from one of our viewers whose on with us now. this person, jennifer says let's hear something about ai and its military implications. drone technology and the ability to select targets without humor and action. do you know enough about this to comment on ai in the military? >> i know that-- i think computer the whole military is based on computer systems. the manhattan project was all modeled on computer systems where richard really immersed in computation as part of the manhattan project and feynman
12:50 am
makes crucial observation that when you're building technology you better respond to reality because reality can't keep pooled and the reality is that these machine learning systems that are completely dependent on human mind. they do not think it all and the idea that these machines somehow our thinking as they shuffle bits and bytes is a religious belief and it's a particularly-- >> that was my point a moment ago. that was my point, so that religious belief actually means there is national security danger in deploying artificial
12:51 am
intelligence on the assumption-- >> that would certainly be true. i don't think they are quite doing that yet, but they are advancing drones quickly, i mean, they are probably exaggerating the capabilities. >> we learned recently in callable one did not work the way president biden thought it was going to work and that was pretty disturbing. >> a group of children from military. [inaudible] >> yeah, well, that's disturbing moreover-- >> i'm not debunking ai. i think ai is great and the evolution of the computer industry causing no threat to
12:52 am
human beings, i mean, the idea that it's comparable to nukes as elon musk describes it is true only that nukes can be deployed by human mind and a eyes can be used to deploy nukes, but the human mind and civilization that keeps us alive. our whole civilization is the product of random mutations of chemistry and physics. i think that's the flat universe theory. physics and chemistry and
12:53 am
disabling philosophy. >> ways oak a minute ago of the derailed failed drone strike in kabul that killed a family with children. you said it wasn't able to distinguish. okay, but what is striking about that example is that if drones were made more sophisticated by their human creators, they might be able to make such distinctions at least approximate them better, but the problem is what if the creators of drone artificial intelligence themselves don't think that human beings are anything special? don't necessarily believe they are something special about mothers and children. what if they don't believe that and they are the ones crating the artificial intelligence to run the drones?
12:54 am
>> all of our systems depend on order and creativity and in the image of our creator and that's the foundation of human life and progress that is disabled and crippled by conception that somehow we are just machines and our machines could inadequately-- could adequately replace us. >> understanding our creativity is because we bear the creator god is not as some people think an obstacle to creativity and progress, but may be the very source of scientific and creativity. >> i agree with that proposition >> i'm thinking of the great
12:55 am
book by stanley called the savior of science published i think in the 1960s, which made that point obviously. we got another interesting comment. we will stop soon, but another interesting comments from our participants and named laura who is a friend of mine. she wrote in saying, care-- can our moral or ethical balances be programmed into ia-- ai? >> it has the potential for conscious and you can program a sort of constraints that you want in the machines you build and you have to do it. i mean, the answer is yes, but it's not as if we are
12:56 am
programming moral conscience. we are programming constraints and parameters. >> like a series for the conscience. okay, here is a question i should pose and let it be may be our last with someone named jacob that has written and during the broadcast saying i would like george to provide his insights into the future of what the world will look like in 10 years and 30 years. george gilder, futurist? >> i expect the domination of the theory of information of economics which prohibits really the future. the future is based on human creativity.
12:57 am
he declared creativity always comes with a surprise to us. the terminus of the theories of economics, that the divine can create a new future and what differentiates our age from the stone age is not a-- not a steady refund of the stones. it's advance of knowledge. knowledge is wealth, growth is learning and it's all constrained by the passage of time, which is what remains is scarce when all else grows
12:58 am
abundant. future unless it's going to be just more of the same in the generation it's got to surprise us and i believe that in 30 years we will live in a world that is almost incomprehensible in some ways technologically from the world we live in today. i think we will go beyond the silicon. i think we will produce and our intelligence machines will depend on a new carbon age just as our brains consist of carbon, so will our intelligent machines in the future consist of various
12:59 am
carbons. introduce in the form of carbon nano fees, devices and other new hybrid materials that can singularly intelligence better than binary silicon machines of today, so i think we will have a lifetime of silicon in 30 years. >> i think-- isn't carbon more plentiful? >> no, it's less plentiful, but silicon is great because it's one of the three most common elements in the earth's crust, which more and more the intel founder believed was
1:00 am
providential, that silicon, aluminum and oxygen are the three most common substances. there's a lot of carbon out there to create carbon machines and i believe the new substrates , the new intelligent machines will be carbon -based. >> at the end of the book "gaming ai" george, you say these interesting words and i think i will stop here. you say an explosion of productivity does not mean an evaporation of work. ai will make people more productive and thus more employable. it will create new and safer and more interesting work. it will generate the capital on
1:01 am
companies and new ventures as new technologies have been through history. .. kyle your count for nothing at the discovery institute thanks to george and everyone who joined us for today's independent conversation from the independent. hearing oakland california have a good day and please join us again, thanks george. >> thank you. >> after words is a weekly
1:02 am
interview program with relevant guest host interviewing top nonfiction authors about their latest work. this week's program, children's hospital of philadelphia infectious disease division chief vaccine education center director talks about the risks associated with the medical innovation. it's interviewed john hopkins university bloomberg school of public health epidemiologist doctor emily gurley. >> a doctor, i am so happy to be talking with you today. >> the pleasure is mine thank you very much. >> obviously the themes in your book are very relevant for what we are going through today in the pandemic. and i know you said you started writing the book around the pandemic began. can you tell us where the idea for the book came from? and why this book now? >> i think the emotion for this book came from the


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on