Dispatch from the Front March 4, 2023

Top

Newsletter 03/04/2023 Back to Contents

Random Stories You Might Not Care About,
And Would Probably Never Come Up in Polite Conversation Anyway

Stupid AI Tricks and Tricksters — But Janey Law Is On the Case & In the Hunt.

source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient#:~:text=sentient%20%5CSEN%2Dshee%2Dunt,sensitive%20in%20perception%20or%20feeling

A former Google employee, Blake Lemoine, who was fired from The House of Bard, has made some rather startling statements to the press regarding the two Tech Giant's, Microsoft and Google, A.I.s. He says they have reached the state of being known as "sentient." [ed. maybe too much microdosing here?] Another example here of someone raised on an All-You-Can-Stomach video diet consisting of old Star Wars movies and Star Trek New Generation reruns. Dude, Brent Spindler is 74 years old and looks it. Data would have never grown old; but he could have eventually become obsolete.

The quixotic quests for, and alternating fears of, some inanimate object coming alive, like a broom in The Sorcerer's Apprentice, and then terrorizing its human master, have been with us for generations. As have inanimate objects that seem to communicate in and with a human's voice, and can also display a modicum of human emotion. Earlier generations were more wise about such things. These talkative toys were called exactly that: toys.

Geezers my age will fondly — or regrettably — remember the Chatty Cathy Doll, manufactured by Mattel Corporation. This was a must have toy from the late 1950s to the mid-1960s. Pull Chatty Cathy's string, and she may tell you, "I love you." She may even tell you that "I hurt myself!"; and maybe Cathy had experienced physical pain. Chatty Cathy would get lonely. "Please take me with you," she might beg her human owner. These were, however, not expressions of feelings. These phrases, like the words of the Large Language Model AI's, were all preprogrammed into Cathy by her manufacturers. And the voice was provided by Rocky and Bullwinkle fans' favorite: June Foray.

Of course, Hollywood, in its infinite ability to turn light into dark, and a child's playful fantasy into the stuff of a child's nightmares, brought us the Mean, Psychotic version of Chatty Cathy, the infamous femme fatale, Talky Tina. Ironically, Tina was also voiced by Ms. Foray.

The episode of The Twilight Zone that brought to life Chatty Cathy's evil cousin was entitled, "The Living Doll."

We children were truly scared out out our wits when Talky Tina declared with a gangster's demeanor:
"My name is Talky Tina... and you'd better be nice to me!" Afterward, we never looked at Chatty Cathy quite the same.

The threats uttered by Talky Tina sounded much like what today's breathless AI critics tell us AI is capable of saying... BUT the AI MEANS IT! There is really nothing new about our current 21^st century tinfoil hat squads yelling about computers coming alive. Whether for entertainment, like that which Hollywood provides, or for the 15 minutes of fame that gets accrued by a fired Google Geek, talking AI — and especially trash talking AI — will get you attention today. But maybe not your next tech job.

One group of adults who have been paying close attention to all the specious claims made those hawking the AIs is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In April of 2020, the FTC warned companies about to, or considering, adopting Artificial Intelligence that their AI marketing ploys could easily run afoul of several Federal Statutes. Uncle Sam's efforts to put some reigns on AI vendors began in the Trump Administration. The admonitions given AI vendors 3 years ago are as salient now as they were then. In fact, the issues haven't changed. Only the stakes are higher due to actual deployment on a wide scale.

Be transparent.
Don’t deceive consumers about how you use automated tools. Oftentimes, AI operates in the background, somewhat removed from the consumer experience. But, when using AI tools to interact with customers (think chatbots), be careful not to mislead consumers about the nature of the interaction.

Be transparent when collecting sensitive data. The bigger the data set, the better the algorithm, and the better the product for consumers, end of story…right? Not so fast. Be careful about how you get that data set. Secretly collecting audio or visual data – or any sensitive data – to feed an algorithm could also give rise to an FTC action

If you make automated decisions based on information from a third-party vendor, you may be required to provide the consumer with an “adverse action” notice. Under the FCRA, a vendor that assembles consumer information to automate decision-making about eligibility for credit, employment, insurance, housing, or similar benefits and transactions, may be a “consumer reporting agency.”

Other issues arising from the use of AI in business are listed. The gist of the FTC directives given to businesses, who base decisions that will impact consumers from data derived from AI sources, is that the rules do not change because the technology has evolved.

You may be thinking: We do AI, not consumer reports, so the FCRA doesn’t apply to us. Well, think again. If you compile and sell consumer information that is used or expected to be used for credit, employment, insurance, housing, or other similar decisions about consumers’ eligibility for certain benefits and transactions, you may indeed be subject to the FCRA.

On February 27, 2023, the FTC updated its positions on AI and its applications in business practices. The FTC began its Blog Posting, or Press Release, with the acknowledgment that, although it is difficult to exactly define what is AI, it is the current cause célèbre.

And what exactly is “artificial intelligence” anyway? It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions. It often refers to a variety of technological tools and techniques that use computation to perform tasks such as predictions, decisions, or recommendations. But one thing is for sure: it’s a marketing term. Right now it’s a hot one. And at the FTC, one thing we know about hot marketing terms is that some advertisers won’t be able to stop themselves from overusing and abusing them

Truth In Advertising is the focus of the FTC and its enforcements in the field of AI. The updated admonitions are what this writer has focused on from the outset. In too many applications, the AI plainly doesn't work. Here is where the FTC is really in the hunt. Nowhere else, except maybe in this blog, has the word "efficacy" been used in conjunction with the claims of AI vendors. Simply mentioning AI in the product marketing doesn't make the product an appropriate or useful application of AI technology — if it even works at all.

But the fact is that some products with AI claims might not even work as advertised in the first place. In some cases, this lack of efficacy may exist regardless of what other harm the products might cause. Marketers should know that — for FTC enforcement purposes — false or unsubstantiated claims about a product’s efficacy are our bread and butter.

Another area of FTC attention is plain false advertising. Something that is now made with our Secret AI Sauce doesn't de facto improve the thing.

Are you promising that your AI product does something better than a non-AI product?
It’s not uncommon for advertisers to say that some new-fangled technology makes their product better – perhaps to justify a higher price or influence labor decisions. You need adequate proof for that kind of comparative claim, too, and if such proof is impossible to get, then don’t make the claim.

Uncle Sam is showing more real understanding of both the AI technology itself, and the deceptive ways it can be promoted, than any other entity that I have come across. One area of FTC interest really gets to the heart of what will be the endless Snake Oil pitches that are already entering our economy and culture.

Does the product actually use AI at all?
If you think you can get away with baseless claims that your product is AI-enabled, think again. In an investigation, FTC technologists and others can look under the hood and analyze other materials to see if what’s inside matches up with your claims. Before labeling your product as AI-powered, note also that merely using an AI tool in the development process is not the same as a product having AI in it.

The FTC ends its 2023 announcement by referencing its 2021 announcement of all the existing ways that AI will come under Federal enforcement. That document's title tells us what the FTC thinks of AI marketing techniques. "Aiming for truth, fairness, and equity in your company’s use of AI." All the Federal Statutes that AI might come in violation of are listed.

Don’t exaggerate what your algorithm can do or whether it can deliver fair or unbiased results. Under the FTC Act, your statements to business customers and consumers alike must be truthful, non-deceptive, and backed up by evidence.

In other words, any specious claims a business might make about its "Proprietary AI," and how that AI will do what has never been done before, like grow hair from a heretofore unknown molecule that could only be found by our AI, better be prepared to back up their otherwise hellacious, and probably specious, claims.

I am glad that somebody is paying attention. Cause this guy is coming out of the woodwork.

Coming Soon To a Screen Near You.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Gerald Reiff

Back to Top ← previous post next post →

Random Stories You Might Not Care About, And Would Probably Never Come Up in Polite Conversation Anyway Stupid AI Tricks and Tricksters — But Janey Law Is On the Case & In the Hunt. source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient#:~:text=sentient%20%5CSEN%2Dshee%2Dunt,sensitive%20in%20perception%20or%20feeling A former Google employee, Blake Lemoine, who was fired from The House of Bard, has made some rather startling statements to the press regarding the two Tech Giant's, Microsoft and Google, A.I.s. He says they have reached the state of being known as "sentient." [ed. maybe too much microdosing here?] Another example here of someone raised on an All-You-Can-Stomach video diet consisting of old Star Wars movies and Star Trek New Generation reruns. Dude, Brent Spindler is 74 years old and looks it. Data would have never grown old; but he could have eventually become obsolete. The quixotic quests for, and alternating fears of, some inanimate object coming alive, like a broom in The Sorcerer's Apprentice, and then terrorizing its human master, have been with us for generations. As have inanimate objects that seem to communicate in and with a human's voice, and can also display a modicum of human emotion. Earlier generations were more wise about such things. These talkative toys were called exactly that: toys. Geezers my age will fondly — or regrettably — remember the Chatty Cathy Doll, manufactured by Mattel Corporation. This was a must have toy from the late 1950s to the mid-1960s. Pull Chatty Cathy's string, and she may tell you, "I love you." She may even tell you that "I hurt myself!"; and maybe Cathy had experienced physical pain. Chatty Cathy would get lonely. "Please take me with you," she might beg her human owner. These were, however, not expressions of feelings. These phrases, like the words of the Large Language Model AI's, were all preprogrammed into Cathy by her manufacturers. And the voice was provided by Rocky and Bullwinkle fans' favorite: June Foray.
	Of course, Hollywood, in its infinite ability to turn light into dark, and a child's playful fantasy into the stuff of a child's nightmares, brought us the Mean, Psychotic version of Chatty Cathy, the infamous femme fatale, Talky Tina. Ironically, Tina was also voiced by Ms. Foray. The episode of The Twilight Zone that brought to life Chatty Cathy's evil cousin was entitled, "The Living Doll."
We children were truly scared out out our wits when Talky Tina declared with a gangster's demeanor: "My name is Talky Tina... and you'd better be nice to me!" Afterward, we never looked at Chatty Cathy quite the same. The threats uttered by Talky Tina sounded much like what today's breathless AI critics tell us AI is capable of saying... BUT the AI MEANS IT! There is really nothing new about our current 21^st century tinfoil hat squads yelling about computers coming alive. Whether for entertainment, like that which Hollywood provides, or for the 15 minutes of fame that gets accrued by a fired Google Geek, talking AI — and especially trash talking AI — will get you attention today. But maybe not your next tech job. One group of adults who have been paying close attention to all the specious claims made those hawking the AIs is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In April of 2020, the FTC warned companies about to, or considering, adopting Artificial Intelligence that their AI marketing ploys could easily run afoul of several Federal Statutes. Uncle Sam's efforts to put some reigns on AI vendors began in the Trump Administration. The admonitions given AI vendors 3 years ago are as salient now as they were then. In fact, the issues haven't changed. Only the stakes are higher due to actual deployment on a wide scale. Be transparent. Don’t deceive consumers about how you use automated tools. Oftentimes, AI operates in the background, somewhat removed from the consumer experience. But, when using AI tools to interact with customers (think chatbots), be careful not to mislead consumers about the nature of the interaction. Be transparent when collecting sensitive data. The bigger the data set, the better the algorithm, and the better the product for consumers, end of story…right? Not so fast. Be careful about how you get that data set. Secretly collecting audio or visual data – or any sensitive data – to feed an algorithm could also give rise to an FTC action If you make automated decisions based on information from a third-party vendor, you may be required to provide the consumer with an “adverse action” notice. Under the FCRA, a vendor that assembles consumer information to automate decision-making about eligibility for credit, employment, insurance, housing, or similar benefits and transactions, may be a “consumer reporting agency.” Other issues arising from the use of AI in business are listed. The gist of the FTC directives given to businesses, who base decisions that will impact consumers from data derived from AI sources, is that the rules do not change because the technology has evolved. You may be thinking: We do AI, not consumer reports, so the FCRA doesn’t apply to us. Well, think again. If you compile and sell consumer information that is used or expected to be used for credit, employment, insurance, housing, or other similar decisions about consumers’ eligibility for certain benefits and transactions, you may indeed be subject to the FCRA. On February 27, 2023, the FTC updated its positions on AI and its applications in business practices. The FTC began its Blog Posting, or Press Release, with the acknowledgment that, although it is difficult to exactly define what is AI, it is the current cause célèbre. And what exactly is “artificial intelligence” anyway? It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions. It often refers to a variety of technological tools and techniques that use computation to perform tasks such as predictions, decisions, or recommendations. But one thing is for sure: it’s a marketing term. Right now it’s a hot one. And at the FTC, one thing we know about hot marketing terms is that some advertisers won’t be able to stop themselves from overusing and abusing them Truth In Advertising is the focus of the FTC and its enforcements in the field of AI. The updated admonitions are what this writer has focused on from the outset. In too many applications, the AI plainly doesn't work. Here is where the FTC is really in the hunt. Nowhere else, except maybe in this blog, has the word "efficacy" been used in conjunction with the claims of AI vendors. Simply mentioning AI in the product marketing doesn't make the product an appropriate or useful application of AI technology — if it even works at all. But the fact is that some products with AI claims might not even work as advertised in the first place. In some cases, this lack of efficacy may exist regardless of what other harm the products might cause. Marketers should know that — for FTC enforcement purposes — false or unsubstantiated claims about a product’s efficacy are our bread and butter. Another area of FTC attention is plain false advertising. Something that is now made with our Secret AI Sauce doesn't de facto improve the thing. Are you promising that your AI product does something better than a non-AI product? It’s not uncommon for advertisers to say that some new-fangled technology makes their product better – perhaps to justify a higher price or influence labor decisions. You need adequate proof for that kind of comparative claim, too, and if such proof is impossible to get, then don’t make the claim. Uncle Sam is showing more real understanding of both the AI technology itself, and the deceptive ways it can be promoted, than any other entity that I have come across. One area of FTC interest really gets to the heart of what will be the endless Snake Oil pitches that are already entering our economy and culture. Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims that your product is AI-enabled, think again. In an investigation, FTC technologists and others can look under the hood and analyze other materials to see if what’s inside matches up with your claims. Before labeling your product as AI-powered, note also that merely using an AI tool in the development process is not the same as a product having AI in it. The FTC ends its 2023 announcement by referencing its 2021 announcement of all the existing ways that AI will come under Federal enforcement. That document's title tells us what the FTC thinks of AI marketing techniques. "Aiming for truth, fairness, and equity in your company’s use of AI." All the Federal Statutes that AI might come in violation of are listed. Don’t exaggerate what your algorithm can do or whether it can deliver fair or unbiased results. Under the FTC Act, your statements to business customers and consumers alike must be truthful, non-deceptive, and backed up by evidence. In other words, any specious claims a business might make about its "Proprietary AI," and how that AI will do what has never been done before, like grow hair from a heretofore unknown molecule that could only be found by our AI, better be prepared to back up their otherwise hellacious, and probably specious, claims. I am glad that somebody is paying attention. Cause this guy is coming out of the woodwork. Coming Soon To a Screen Near You.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Gerald Reiff