Brandon’s view of Wiener:

As I was reading today’s assignments, Wiener’s article in particular caught my attention (okay, the Burroughs’ cut-up theory has interested me for a long time, too). I was interested to learn of Wiener’s theory of ethics in cybernetic development and that this theory spawned from his work in the iron triangle as a reaction to the development of the atomic bomb. Until I had a good look at Wiener, I was under the impression that the only people who seemed to be really interrogating cybernetics were Hollywood scriptwriters (a scary state of affairs). In addition to learning that ethics were considered from an early time in the history of computer-human interaction, I was shortly thereafter floored by the possibilities of what Wiener describes in his chapter. On the one hand, we have a culture that ignores the ethics of AI development, which inevitably ends with machine gods that devour humans like in the films Metropolis or the Matrix. And on the other hand, we preprogram computers with ethical responses (like in managing waste valves as Wiener describes) in which case we have a much happier outcome. Think, for example, of the most immoral, godless institution ever devised by humans—insurance companies—and add a computer that can elicit predetermined moral responses. Currently, an insurance computer determines what the path of least cost/greatest profit is and bases its decision accordingly, but imagine if the computer was actually trained to value human life in a sense that it would chose a costlier course of action to insure saving lives. The computer would follow its predetermined moral path methodically and without any deviation, and it would absolutely function with a complete disregard for the profiteering that insurance employees have proven incapable of doing. Immediately, the question arises, “who gets to preprogram the computer’s morals?” I would like to suggest that as long as the programming is done publicly, its use enforced by law, and absolutely no lobbyists are allowed within 500 feet of the programmers, the customer service qualities of our insurance company’s would improve.

Cut-up/Redux: Wiener’s view of Brandon (note, must be read while techno music is playing):

On the one hand, we have a culture that ignores the ethics of AI development, which inevitably ends with machine gods that devour humans like in the films Metropolis or the Matrix. Immediately, the question arises, “who gets to preprogram the computer’s morals?” Until I had a good look at Wiener, I was under the impression that the only people who seemed to be really interrogating cybernetics were Hollywood scriptwriters (a scary state of affairs). Think, for example, of the most immoral, godless institution ever devised by humans—insurance companies—and add a computer that can elicit predetermined moral responses. The computer would follow its predetermined moral path methodically and without any deviation, and it would absolutely function with a complete disregard for the profiteering that insurance employees have proven incapable of doing. I was interested to learn of Wiener’s theory of ethics in cybernetic development and that this theory spawned from his work in the iron triangle as a reaction to the development of the atomic bomb. Currently, an insurance computer determines what the path of least cost/greatest profit is and bases its decision accordingly, but imagine if the computer was actually trained to value human life in a sense that it would chose a costlier course of action to insure saving lives. As I was reading today’s assignments, Wiener’s article in particular caught my attention (okay, the Burroughs’ cut-up theory has interested me for a long time, too). I would like to suggest that as long as the programming is done publicly, its use enforced by law, and absolutely no lobbyists are allowed within 500 feet of the programmers, the customer service qualities of our insurance company’s would improve. In addition to learning that ethics were considered from an early time in the history of computer-human interaction, I was shortly thereafter floored by the possibilities of what Wiener describes in his chapter. And on the other hand, we preprogram computers with ethical responses (like in managing waste valves as Wiener describes) in which case we have a much happier outcome.