I come back to the matter of A.I. because the absence of any comments to a previous posting of mine here indicates that precious few people actually know enough about it in order to submit any follow-up comments, or opinions on the matter...
Did we not get regular hand-wringing public warnings about A.I. from "insiders" like Elon Musk and Bill Gates advising the planet to steer well-clear of it...? It was enough to make even me dread the reality of some consequent superior hardware-software Frankenstein nemesis to elevate itself to the fore & systematically commit genocide upon the entire human race, not at all unlike that roboticized-mechanized computer-driven "Nomad" satellite did in a late 1960's episode of the TV series "Star Trek". But suddenly & with absolutely no warning whatsoever in the past few months, the media is just replete with stories of A.I.'s open presence in our midst right now! In fact, its effects are threatening to compromise political discussion-policies, it os already influencing what our kids are learning in schools, it's affecting the advertising industry, it's having a twistong-turning effect upon the news in general, etc. etc. etc.
How was it that I managed somehow to sleep through this revolutionary transformation...? What was the exact date on the calendar when we opened-up this A.I. Pandora's Box, anyway...? I don't recall any consequent hoopla & charisma erupting from A.I.'s release out of the genie's bottle -- do you...? Or was it all some sort of a nefariously devious plot executed by A.I. itself, to make it so...?!
From what I've seen so far, Artificial Intelligence is lacking that one key element featured in its very name: "intelligence". It strikes me as being little more -- again -- than a computerized "cut & paste" exercise melded with PhotoShop, only much more refined & seamless. The prime force behind its vaunted & heralded capabilities still remains that very same proverbial "man behind the curtain" who is using A.I. as nothing more than a tool to advance his-her own personal agenda upon others, for reasons known only to him-her. A.I. is hardly any sort of a "self-starting" force to be reckoned with -- it has a master pulling levers & yanking cords in order to make it follow his directions. It's hardly the other way around as all of the warnings had professed.
So what am I missing here, besides my participation in any "mass hysteria" that is...? Somebody -- a flesh & blood somebody -- has always lusted for power & dominion over others throughout humankind's history & evolution: I simply can't see persons of that inclination-disposition willingly surrender the possibilities of a superior position over others to a machine, be it "intelligent" or otherwise. I can however, appreciate how these very same persons would readily embrace that part of A.I. that might execute their handiwork far more swiftly & convincingly than they themselves might. In other words, to utilize the advantages of computer-generated A.I. as a tool to benefit them. And not the other way around.