The doomsday scenarios spun around this theme are so outlandish -- like The Matrix, in which human-created artificial intelligence plugs humans into a simulated reality to harvest energy from their bodies -- it's difficult to visualize them as serious threats. Meanwhile, artificially intelligent systems continue to develop apace. Self-driving cars are beginning to share our roads; pocket-sized devices respond to our queries and manage our schedules in real-time; algorithms beat us at Go; robots become better at getting up when they fall over. It's obvious how developing these technologies will benefit humanity. But, then -- don't all the dystopian sci-fi stories start out this way? One is overly credulous scare-mongering. But the other extreme is equally dangerous -- complacency that we don't need to think about these issues, because humanity-threatening AI is decades or more away.

ACCORDING to some prominent voices in the tech world, artificial intelligence presents a looming existential threat to humanity: Warnings by luminaries like Elon Musk and Nick Bostrom about "the singularity" -- when machines become smarter than humans -- have attracted millions of dollars and spawned a multitude of conferences. But this hand-wringing is a distraction from the very real problems with artificial intelligence today, which may already be exacerbating inequality in the workplace, at home and in our legal and judicial systems. Sexism, racism and other forms of discrimination are being built into the machine-learning algorithms that underlie the technology behind many "intelligent" systems that shape how we are categorized and advertised to. Take a small example from last year: Users discovered that Google's photo app, which applies automatic labels to pictures in digital photo albums, was classifying images of black people as gorillas. Google apologized; it was unintentional.

AS DOOMSDAY SCENARIOS go, it does not sound terribly frightening. The "paperclip maximiser" is a thought experiment proposed by Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford University. Imagine an artificial intelligence, he says, which decides to amass as many paperclips as possible. It devotes all its energy to acquiring paperclips, and to improving itself so that it can get paperclips in new ways, while resisting any attempt to divert it from this goal. Eventually it "starts transforming first all of Earth and then increasing portions of space into paperclip manufacturing facilities". This apparently silly scenario is intended to make the serious point that AIs need not have human-like motives or psyches.

Our privacy policy: Your resume and information will be kept completely confidential.

Machine-learning algorithms are ubiquitous these days. Technology giants like Netflix Inc., Amazon.com Inc. and Google Inc. use them to suggest items customers might like based on their past browsing. Scientists use them to identify gene mutations associated with treatment resistance or amenable to targeted drug therapy. And doctors use them for image classification, early disease detection and better treatment outcomes. These algorithms can improve quality of life and can even help save lives.

We have been hearing predictions for decades of a takeover of the world by artificial intelligence. In 1957, Herbert A. Simon predicted that within 10 years a digital computer would be the world's chess champion. That didn't happen until 1996. And despite Marvin Minsky's 1970 prediction that "in from three to eight years we will have a machine with the general intelligence of an average human being," we still consider that a feat of science fiction. The pioneers of artificial intelligence were surely off on the timing, but they weren't wrong; AI is coming.

If the University of Hairy Nipples' Fighting Areolas want to play on blue turf, then by cracky, go to town: It had all come a long, long, long way from 1993, when EA launched a college football series minus the rights to school names and logos (Michigan vs. BYU could be simulated as'Ann Arbor' vs. 'Provo') to mirror its successful Madden franchise, even slapping the name of another iconic Bay Area coach, Bill Walsh -- then about to wrap up his second tenure at Stanford University -- on the title. Within a few years, the series had dropped the Walsh name but added collegiate licensing, exploding in the summer of 1995 with 108 schools, conference logos and real bowl names (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar). It's dead -- technically on a hiatus -- now, a run of more than 20 summers slammed shut in 2013 not by consumer disinterest but legal entanglement. Because even if EA couldn't use players' names, as it violated the NCAA's rules regarding amateurism, programmers were inclined to approximate with every school the real-life attributes, from both a skill and physique standpoint, of its star players in any given season: You knew who they were. They knew who they were. If even if you didn't, the game eventually featured a customizer with sliders that accounted for the most precise of details and free downloadable fan-generated rosters that did all of the naming work for you. A lot of folks got rich off NCAA Football, of course, save for the players whom the game wasn't really (wink) trying (wink) to (wink) emulate (wink). Enter Ed O'Bannon and his legal team, and ne'er the twain; rather than wrestle with how to compensate its student-athletes going forward, the SEC, Big Ten and Pac-12 conferences, three of the so-called Power 5 leagues, forbade the use of their trademarks after the summer of 2013, and EA pulled the plug. And that's the Catch-22: Even thought we know it was wrong, we still miss it.

MUNICH (Reuters) – Europe's growing army of robot workers could be classed as "electronic persons" and their owners liable to paying social security for them if the European Union adopts a draft plan to address the realities of a new industrial revolution. Robots are being deployed in ever-greater numbers in factories and also taking on tasks such as personal care or surgery, raising fears over unemployment, wealth inequality and alienation. Their growing intelligence, pervasiveness and autonomy requires rethinking everything from taxation to legal liability, a draft European Parliament motion, dated May 31, suggests. Some robots are even taking on a human form. Visitors to the world's biggest travel show in March were greeted by a lifelike robot developed by Japan's Toshiba and were helped by another made by France's Aldebaran Robotics.

You, client! may not be science fiction for much longer. On both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere, British authors Richard and Daniel Susskind and others predict Artificial Intelligence is on the cusp of changing the legal profession more than any other technology. We've already seen the transformation triggered by word-processing, the Internet and e-mail, but the high hourly rates of legal professionals and the exorbitant expense of court time demand more reform. The B.C. government has been an early adopter of software solutions and the province already has a handful of dispute-resolution and legal platforms intended to make access to legal services and justice easier and cheaper. The next development, however, is heralded by the arrival of "digital legal advisers" -- the progeny of Deep Blue, which destroyed the chess hegemony of humanity, and Watson, which ruined Jeopardy!

From answering queries to predicting future of your relationship, a lot is already being said and written about Artificial Intelligence (AI). We've seen movies depicting the technology like Matrix, and even Bollywood doesn't fall short of explaining what's AI, of course with a fair share of melodrama. But, what seems fascinating and equally scary is a new report talking about an AI arms race. An army of machines may be decades away, and Anja Kaspersen, Head of International Security, World Economic Forum, pointing at a survey of AI researchers by TechEmergence (via Medium) points out how it poses an array of security concerns which could be curbed by timely implementation of norms and protocols. There are many questions raised about how AI could be a life-changing and threatening factor, and what it is goes into the hands of some malicious minds.