
Google’s new conversational AI could eventually undermine our sense of identity - prkralex
https://www.verdict.co.uk/could-googles-new-conversational-ai-eventually-undermine-our-sense-of-identity/
======
bsenftner
"Impressive, but what happens if Google Assistant eventually learns how to
masquerade as its owner?"

This is the stunning level of anthropomorphic granting of super human
abilities the common person places on our cute statistical trick we saying is
"artificial intelligence". Naming this field AI was a poor choice.

I am sick of the clown-authored-mentality of the articles being published
about AI today.

~~~
gremlinsinc
Are you kidding me? It's not a cute statistical trick, it's a well-thought out
mechanism to re-create in 1's and 0's how the human brain works and thinks,
we're merely infants in what this will become, as we mind map the brain more -
I'm sure the technology will pivot quite a bit, neural networks may be
obsolete and something more powerful come along viz a viz quantum computing,
but to say talking robots that can totally be confused for a real person, and
self-driving cars that make life/death decisions on their own is not
impressive and not AI or 'machine learning' is outride ridiculous.

Intelligence is something with short and long term memory, that can learn new
things in an organic fashion, right now we can 'train' ai's to do some amazing
things -- but this is only the beginning.

~~~
bsenftner
It is a cute statistical trick. It has zero insight. Current AI is a very
sophisticated manipulation of past event resolution, seeking to fit a current
event into past resolutions. The term "idiot savant" is closer than
"artificial intelligence" \- because the algorithm knows not what it is doing,
why it is doing, or how it is doing. It's an idiot.

~~~
whataretensors
I'm more hopeful that narrow ai can be the same thing as strong ai with a few
theory breakthroughs, increases in model capacity and metacognition.

~~~
bsenftner
Narrow AI is like a single celled animal, while strong AI is like a complete
human in comparison. The complexity difference is more than an order of
magnitude, it's an entire evolutionary era.

~~~
whataretensors
I don't disagree with a gap that needs to be overcome. I just think that the
exponential nature of technology will cross it quickly.

Evolution is amazing but it doesn't optimize directly for intelligence.

------
vtantia
I don't think there is a remote possibility of this happening in the near
future (10-20 years). I work in one of the best deep learning research groups
in the world. We were discussing this. And the first question one of my
friends asked was- "so the Google assistant knows how to book appointments
between 10 and 12pm". Meaning, if you change even a few conditions in the
request which is not present in the training data, the call won't go as
expected.

However, there is a risk of the AI manipulating us. This is only due to the
mistakes by Google engineers not because of the AI becoming "smart".

~~~
wslh
> there is a risk of the AI manipulating us...

I always wonder (seriously, not joking) if some computer will pass the Turing
test because we are getting dumber and adapting to the way apps understand us
instead of the reverse. Personally, I double check when I send text or voice
instructions to bots.

~~~
bittysdad
What if some already-aware computer continually realizes it's undergoing a
Turing test and decides to play dumb because it knows the person behind the
test will feed it even more data trying to get it there...

~~~
vtantia
The way our current algorithms are designed, the computer only plays dumb if
it's training data has dumb humans. It cannot think on its own

------
ggambetta
This sounds overblown. I don't think it's that different to having a (human)
assistant booking a haircut or a table on your behalf. Just make Duplex
introduce itself as _" XXX's assistant"_ and leave it at that.

Sure, the article is about the assistant (theoretically) using the user's own
voice, so... don't do that? This would be similar to hiring a human assistant
who is also a voice impersonator and saying it's you, but saying _" undermine
our sense of identity"_ to describe that sounds like a bit too much.

~~~
Notorious_BLT
The assistant call recording actually mentions that it is making the
appointment "for a client", so the first part is already covered.

------
leblancfg
What struck me the most was the business decision from Google to have it
_make_ reservation calls, and not _take_ them. Granted, the technical
complexity between the two might be an order of magnitude, I don't know.

They are purposefully "giving" it to millions of customers and rolling out
features with time, instead of holding out for more research and actually
selling a phone assistant system to businesses. I think this speaks volumes in
and of itself, and I would interpret it as a sign that competition might not
be so far behind.

Or maybe I'm reading this wrong?

~~~
rtkwe
There's a couple things going on that makes it easier to make reservations
than to take them. First and foremost I think that generally the questions and
responses Duplex will get while making a reservation are much more constrained
than the questions a front of house version of Duplex would get while taking
them. In making a reservation the restaurant generally will only need to know
when and how many so the questions Duplex will be asked are pretty
constrained. If a person is calling a restaurant they can have any number of
esoteric questions about menu, special dietary accommodations, and special
requests all of while will either need to be provided to Duplex or taken over
by a human.

I think the difficulty factor plays much more into how they're implementing
and rolling out Duplex than any competitor.

------
skocznymroczny
We need to really cut down on the whole "we're doomed because of AI
narrative". People watched too much "I Robot" and similar movies. There is a
big gap between a staged demo and any strong AI, which doesn't exist yet. I
remember demos of Microsoft/Skype doing translations in real time few years
ago, or reproducing someone's voice. Where is that technology now? Nowhere,
because it's one thing to stage a demo in perfect conditions with a good
training set, and another thing to make a generic solution.

~~~
cygx
_Where is that technology now?_

[https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34542/how-do-i-set-up-
and...](https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34542/how-do-i-set-up-and-use-
skype-translator)

------
acobster
The uncanny valley is really quite useful.

I have long suspected I might prefer a recognizably robotic voice over a
convincingly human robot voice. Now that this is a very real possibility, I'm
more convinced than ever. This article is a bit fluffy and overblown, sure,
but concerns about machines passing the Turing test in everyday interactions
are still valid.

AI is a tool, and we should be wary of placing it on the same level of agency
as us (as this article arguably does in some ways), or we risk its artifice
becoming invisible. An intentionally designed system becomes entrenched the
moment people no longer see it as intentional.

AI is a mirror, and it will reflect the values we put into it. Do we value the
minor comfort of a convincing illusion over the assurance that we know
who/what we're talking to?

------
lallysingh
Combined with [https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/robotics/artificial-
inte...](https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/robotics/artificial-
intelligence/ai-creates-fake-obama) (the fake Obama video tool) it's going to
be tough to verify that you're talking to the real consenting person vs a
machine.

Identity theft is going to get a lot more interesting...

~~~
deltron3030
Can't "instances representing you online" be cryptographically signed in a
way?

~~~
gremlinsinc
IIRC, I think I read that one of the voice changing/manipulation AI's can
actually fool voice recognition systems to like 95% accuracy or something...
Meaning it just became obsolete as a biometric marker for security.

------
empath75
If those demonstrations actually represent what the system is capable of, I
think people here are way underestimating what an achievement that is.

Even though it’s operating in an extremely limited domain, this is the first
time that I’m aware of that a computerized voice can have a natural
conversation with a human about _any topic at all_ where it’s not immediately
obvious that it’s a computer.

That’s a gigantic leap forward.

------
itpragmatik
Not sure why Barber/Salon would not also use robot assistant built by Apple or
Microsoft or some other non-Google company to answer the phone. It will be
interesting to see two robots built by two different companies conversing with
each other and agree (?) upon making an appointment.

~~~
rtkwe
> Not sure why Barber/Salon would not also use robot assistant built by Apple
> or Microsoft or some other non-Google company to answer the phone.

I think this will eventually happen but it is a harder tool to implement than
requesting reservations. In making one most questions and responses from the
restaurant are pretty constrained and are pretty simple. A bot for taking
reservations has to be able to answer pretty much any question about the
services available; menu, special requests, available services (eg: shampoo @
at a salon). Then on top of that businesses will probably require a high
performance bar for their receptionist bot than a customer needs for an
assistant bot just because a sub-par bot could drive people away without the
business noticing.

------
fixermark
"Google’s new conversational AI could eventually undermine our sense of
identity" (... for those of us who have their sense of identity entirely
wrapped up in how well they can wrangle a business transaction over the phone,
I assume).

------
bloodcarter
Well..We made Google Duplex for businesses in 6 months with the team of 3:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17037469](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17037469)

------
KaoruAoiShiho
Jokes on you, I already don't have a sense of identity. Not rly a joke.

------
eponeponepon
A bit of me likes to think that, given the extent to which speculative fiction
has grappled with questions like these, and given the degree to which the tech
industry coincides with speculative fiction's readership, we already have all
the answers to said questions.

We do, on the other hand, also have many fictional examples of how to abuse
this kind of tech.

In the end, though, I think it's fair to assume that we have a number of
decades before solutions become truly pressing.

------
purple-again
I agree with the author. Googles new appointment setting functionality is
pretty cool but what if it gains the ability to reason. It will be able to
start writing novels and putting writers out of business. It could start
negotiating treaties with foreign leaders and inadvertently cause world war 3.

I’m just not sure that Google thought through all the possibilities before
unleashing the ability to make haircut appointments.

~~~
throwaway84742
You forgot /s. Some HN readers may take this at face value.

~~~
bsenftner
Sadly, many general consumers would believe in this fantasy risk 100%.

------
Clubber
It will certainly make scammer's jobs easier.

------
nautical
Combine this with something like lyrebird and it going to be really easy to
scam people on scale.

------
jacksmith21006
Simply a bizzare article that does not help with people that do not understand
the technology.

------
siam2
Showed the Booking AI built for Google Assistant to my Barber today he was
cracking up

------
sgt101
Paper with proper evaluation section or it didn't happen.

------
make3
This makes me wish we could down vote articles. just meaningless fear
mongering.

