Where should the line be drawn for advancing technology into artificial intelligence and when does it become detrimental? Growing up, I remember when apple would release new iPods and new iPhones. I also remember when flips phones were hip and having a blackberry was high class because web browsing. Through out my life, I've watched society and myself become attached to the most advanced technology available. This has made me interested in the next form of technology headed our way, which is artificial intelligence. Looking at artificial intelligence, it's hard to grasp how I feel about it. For one, I am excited for AI because it helps make life easier. Having robots taking over our simple tasks sounds great because it would allow me to be even lazier than I already am. On the other hand, AI scares me because it reminds me that the human race is becoming less human and more robotic. Then again, what does it mean to be human? I discovered the AI discussion when I took a psychology class that focused on film and literature. Ever since then, I've feared the robotic take over. Being a young person who is constantly around the most advanced technology, I think I am in the right place to talk about this issue. 

The article "Why 2015 Was a Break Through Year in Artificial Intelligence", by Jack Clark, explains the advancements and the speed of AI's progression in 2015.  Jeff Dean, a senior fellow at Google, says the pace of AI is actually speeding up. The article then gives examples of companies developing AI machines and then points to a graph of how AI makes fewer mistakes over the years and another graph that shows companies using more AI. Then article then closes with Dean saying that we are in a point of evolution where animals now have eyes and these animals are computers. The values at stake are computers being considered more human and intelligent. The bias this article has is that the author must think AI is a good thing because he is only highlighting the achievements of AI and making it seems more humane. The graphs only show the positive progression of AI and not anything negative. 

The article "AI is Transforming Google Search. The Rest of The Web is Next" by Cade Metz starts out by describing the retirement of Amit Singhal, the person who over saw Google's search engine. The person who is taking over his position is John Giannandrea, who happens to be in charge of Google's AI. Giannandrea's work includes neural nets, which is AI's ability to learn just like the neurons of the brain. This approach is known as deep learning. In 2015, Google launched its deep learning called RankBrain and it was majorly successful. The article does have some good bias because it advocates for AI but also notes that neural nets makes human lose some control. Metz assures readers that engineers can trace how numbers behave in the neural nets. You may have noticed that what you search on Google becomes what is advertised on some websites. This is how neural nets are working. 

"Chip Promises Brain-like AI in Your Mobile Devices", by Jon Fingas, describes the current situation where there is no neural nets in mobile devices because they are so small and aren't practical enough.  However, MIT developed Eyeriss, which is a chip that can bring AI to low powered devices. Eyeriss will consume 10 times less power than mobile devices today. The trick is Eyeriss is its cores to have memory and to compress information when it leaves the device. This will allow devices to get information to its users without the Internet because of its ability to learn. This article isn't as biased as the other two articles because it is more informative but still advocated for AI in everyday life like smart phones. This article really draws in its audience because it offers a fix to a problem that almost everyone faces; phone battery dying. 

The problem with AI progressing in our world is that it put the human race at risk for losing power. Every one of these articles offers advancements for technology for humans but in return, humans are going to be doing less and becoming lazier. This is arguable because some people think that AI will advance society and make humans better off. Others think that AI is detrimental to humans because it makes for the brain to work less and computers to work more. The first article was successful in proving the factual evidence that AI is on the rise but I don't agree that we should consider computers a part of an animal like evolution. The 2nd article concerned me at the end when Giannandrea said that we don't have to write the rules for learning systems, implying that they can write themselves because they are so smart. 

