This article aims to demonstrate how the approach to computing is being disrupted by deep learning (artificial neural networks), not only in terms of techniques but also in our interactions with machines. It also addresses the philosophical tradition of hermeneutics (Don Ihde, Wilhelm Dilthey) to highlight a parallel with this movement and to demystify the idea of human-like AI.

AI ethics is an emerging field with multiple, competing narratives about how to best solve the problem of building human values into machines. Two major approaches are focused on bias and compliance, respectively. But neither of these ideas fully encompasses ethics: using moral principles to decide how to act in a particular situation. Our method posits that the way data is labeled plays an essential role in the way AI behaves, and therefore in the ethics of machines themselves. The argument combines a fundamental insight from ethics (i.e. that ethics is about values) with our practical experience building and scaling machine learning systems. We want to build AI that is actually ethical by first addressing foundational concerns: how to build good systems, how to define what is good in relation to system architecture, and who should provide that definition. Building ethical AI creates a foundation of trust between a company and the users of that platform. But this trust is unjustified unless users experience the direct value of ethical AI. Until users have real control over how algorithms behave, something is missing in current AI solutions. This causes massive distrust in AI, and apathy towards AI ethics solutions. The scope of this paper is to propose an alternative path that allows for the plurality of values and the freedom of individual expression. Both are essential for realizing true moral character.

I recently read The Age of AI: And Our Human Future by Henry Kissinger, Eric Schmidt, and Daniel Huttenlocher. The book describes itself as "an essential roadmap to our present and our future." We certainly need more business-, government-, and philosophical-centric books on artificial intelligence rather than hype and fantasy. Despite high hopes, in terms of its promise as a roadmap, the book is wanting. Some of the reviews on Amazon focused on the lack of examples of artificial intelligence and the fact that the few provided, like Halicin and AlphaZero, are banal and repeatedly filled up the pages.

On this week's If Then, Slate's April Glaser and Will Oremus try to make sense of Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey's rare honest assessment of his company's shortfalls, and what new state regulations mean for self-driving cars and trucks. Cody Wilson, the man behind the first 3-D–printed gun, joins the hosts to talk about his vision of a "WikiLeaks for guns" and why he thinks gun control is no longer possible. And as always, Don't Close My Tabs: This week Will looks at the "deepfakes" video phenomenon and April discusses former Trump aide Sam Nunberg's email inbox exhaustion.

Over the last few years, there has been a worldwide resurgence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to the point where it dominates almost all business, investment, and ethical narratives. There have formed two extreme views of AI: In one it is believed that AI will augment humans, and in the other it is believed that AI will diminish them, to the point of even threatening humanity's existence. The truth will lie somewhere in between. Many of the arguments on both sides are informed by the results stemming from a technique called Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) that has given AI anthropomorphic qualities often associated with human motivations. The techniques used to train AI algorithms, broadly called Machine Learning, essentially mimic Operant Conditioning, which includes positive and negative reinforcement methods to increase the rate of a particular desired outcome or decrease the rate of an undesired outcome.

Nietzsche, if alive today, will probably be convinced that artificial intelligence will be the final nail in the coffin of god (reference to his famous statement: god is dead). Nietzsche's controversial statement, which is widely understood to be referring to the concept that science will diminish the role and belief system related to religions (the rise of nihilism), can be resurrected to analyze the developments in AI. Religion has been an extremely important part of our species. From the recent archeological findings in Gobekli Tepe (Turkey), experts now believe that 11,000 years ago, before humans settled into organized farming communities, hunters and gatherers erected a temple for worship (1). It means that religion plays such an important role in our lives that before we built our own homes, we built homes to hoist gods and goddesses.

"What is the ape to a man? And so shall man be to the Übermensch." Years ago, as a teenager in France, I used to visit a family friend, Monsieur de la Place. He lived with his wife in a high-rise in a small town outside of Paris. An old man, one side of his body had been paralyzed by a stroke. He was very educated and profound, and became a mentor of sorts to me for a time.