EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Dr. Philip Neches

Dr. Philip Neches

Posted: February 17, 2011 12:19 AM

A machine named Watson became the new Jeopardy champion on national television last night. Another supposedly uniquely human achievement, mastery of trivia game shows, fell, just like chess did a few years ago. What should we make of it?

For some, the event echoes the apocalyptic science fiction of the 1950's, where computers, or robots, or space aliens intervene to "take over" from humanity. Sometimes it's benevolent, "for our own good" to "save us from ourselves" as in The Day the Earth Stood Still or any number of Isaac Asimov stories featuring omniscient supercomputers or mind-reading robots. Sometimes it is the "end of humanity" at least as we've known it, as in Colossus: The Forbin Project.

I take a different view, based on evolutionary biology. Since my formal education and business experience is in computer science, I tend to look at evolution in terms of information. For the first few billion years of life on Earth, single cell organisms were limited to the information stored in the DNA in their nucleus. That information dictated the entire behavior and capability of that species of micro-critter.

Then life developed multi-cellular organisms, starting with plaques and mats of identical bacteria, but then plants and animals. Animals developed nerves and brains. With brains, animals developed a way of storing information outside the cell nucleus, coded in proteins. With nerves, animals developed ways to collect and act on information.

Animals can learn from experience, and from each other. Anyone who watches nature shows sees the process of a baby elephant learning to be an elephant, or a baby wolf learning to be a wolf. And it makes us humans feel warm and fuzzy inside, because we do the same thing: teach baby humans to be humans.

But there is one thing we teach our young that no other species does - not even very intelligent species like chimpanzees or whales. We teach our young how to read and write. You see, we are the only species on our planet that has learned how to store information outside our physical bodies.

At first, the information we could store was clumsy and limited: scratches on rocks or marks on tree bark. It was not the amount of information we stored outside our bodies that mattered, but its persistence through space and time. By writing and reading, people can learn from other people who they have never met and never will meet. We can literally learn from the dead, as well as the distant, because we can read what they wrote.

No other animal on Earth can do that. It makes what we call civilization possible. And with civilization, we gained mastery of other plants, animals, and the environment, increasingly able to make them serve our needs and wants.

Our ways of storing information improved with time. We invented paper, ink, and the printing press. We tamed lightning, and found that electricity, magnetism, and light could be harnessed to move, store, and process information far faster and in far greater volume.

We get better and better at learning. Over 90% of what humanity knows, about everything, was learned during my lifetime. About every 2 years, the total amount of information we have doubles. How can we possibly keep up?

The earliest good answer came not from science fiction, but from romantic comedy. In the 1957 classic, Desk Set, the research department at the fictional Federal Broadcasting Network is set a-twitter by a new-fangled computer called EMERAC and the aging boy genius behind it, played by Spencer Tracy. Scriptwriters Phoebe and Henry Ephron and the original playwright William Marchant envisioned EMERAC as, well, Google in a box - a very big, temperamental box. In other words, a search engine.

Of course, everyone is afraid that the computer will replace them, and all of the plot complications revolve around that notion. But at the end of the movie, we learn that the research department is about to be swamped with more work, and even with EMERAC, they need to hire more good people to keep up.

In one of her best roles, Katherine Hepburn played the head of the research department and Spencer Tracy's love interest. Because she knows what is the right question and when the answer coming back is simply nonsense, she ends up with the job, the guy, and the credit. The president of the network wants more people like her, people who can get the best out of both man and machine.

Oh, yes, her character's name was Bunny Watson.

 

Follow Dr. Philip Neches on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@pmneches

 
  • Comments
  • 4
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:18 AM on 2/18/2011
Well this is interestin­g. Watson level computers are not the evil robots of the 1950s pulp fiction. The problem with Watson is what uses this sort of thing will be put to by humans who own Watson. The Watson sort of thing as a commoditie­s trader would do exactly what?

There is already an accumulati­on of wealth by the top 1% that is only possible through technology­, add Watson cousins into this gigantic problem and it will get more critical, as it is already really.

Watson is a world changing type of thing, It is very well likely that the people who will own the Watson cousins will be computer illiterate­. It reminds me ever so much of the Royal families of Europe before and during World War One, clueless. They owned and controlled everything at the beginning of the war. They were not aware at all, nor were their ministers and lackeys.Mi­llions of people (their subjects) lost their lives due to their Royal stupidity in the face of technologi­cal change. You know radio, submarines­, machine guns, tanks, ciphers and codes, poison gas, air planes. When the war was over... not a one of them had any power or control. It is important to note this: not even the victorious could preserve the world they had power over..

Us common people need to be very afraid... not of Watson but of the people on the other end of all the wires (apologies to Ester Dyson).
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Dr. Philip Neches
Entrepreneur, scientist, history buff
10:05 AM on 2/18/2011
The people who own Watson, like the people who own Google, are the millions of shareholde­rs through pension funds. People like, well, you and me.

What will become of it does indeed depend on the people at the end of the wires. They may be the aspirant youth of Egypt or the control-ob­sessed bureaucrac­y of China. But those people also include you and me, because that's how we're having this dialog, and how others can share in it.
05:03 PM on 2/17/2011
As I read this I thought about the ways in which animals store informatio­n outside their bodies, as they mark their territorie­s. I also believe that bees and ants use various extra-body techniques to keep track of food sources. Simplistic­, but it meets the criterion; and it does suggest that informatio­n storage is not so much a uniquely human trait, as an animal trait of which humans are far more capable than any animal we know of.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Dr. Philip Neches
Entrepreneur, scientist, history buff
10:11 AM on 2/18/2011
In summarizin­g billions of years of evolution in a few paragraphs­, I did gloss over any number of things. My son, who is a microbiolo­gy graduate student at UC Davis, pointed out others. However, no other species makes as abundant and flexible use of informatio­n outside our bodies as we do.