Oxford Conference On Global Catastrophes and The Superhuman…
On July 17th 2008, a team of international experts met to address the possibility of global catastrophes and their consequences in the very first conference of its kind. Among other topics, the team’s discourse focused on how to protect life as we know it, and how to minimize the damage from potential disasters. Other discussions included nuclear terrorism, and emergency measures necessitated from colliding asteroids. As interesting as all of this was, it didn’t come close to the most interesting aspect…
The last day of the event was exclusively reserved for discussing emerging technologies, and the consequences of “superintelligent machines.” As a matter of fact, Dr. Nick Bostrum, director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute, remarked, “Any entity which is radically smarter than human beings would also be very powerful.” Bostrum is a proponent of ‘transhumanism’– a movement dedicated to the research of emerging technologies insofar as they impact human life, which investigates how technologies could either help or harm the human species. Transhumanists like Bostrum predict a future where aspects of artificial intelligence and nanotechnology are used to catapult the human intellect into a being he refers to as ‘posthuman.’ He contends the beings will be so exceedingly advanced that they will longer be considered human. Period.
Now, juxtapose this information with a current article from CNN entitled “Human Remote Control Might Spell End For Teachers.” The article focuses on the work of University of California doctoral student Jacob Whitehill, whose facial recognition software can amazingly accelerate the speed of a video tape. The teaching robots created at U of C are part of the ITS project- Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Mike Stone writes:
Although robot teachers of varying abilities have existed for more than 30 years, ITS developments such as Whitehill’s and Olney’s are pushing beliefs that robots could soon be as effective — if not more effective — than human teachers.
Dr. Andrew Olney, a University of Memphis researcher, argues that current ITS are already better than existing, inexperienced teachers. Furthermore, the ITS philosophy is based on a one-to-one, interactive learning model, which traditional teaching is unable to deliver.
So… what does this all mean? At the most obvious level, it means that educators must commit themselves to lifelong learning. Veteran, technologically illiterate teachers may find themselves facing remediation, as the standard for use is becoming more of a focused requirement, instead of just an admired skill. The days of teaching one year, twenty-five times are looonnngggg gone. Daniel Pink, I think you are absolutely correct… Artistry, empathy, and holistic capabilities will always separate us (in this case, teachers) from them (computers), and we must aim for mastery…
Leave a Reply