With this post I want to give an apology to Google, and to you, for some recent reporting here at CTOvision. I let my emotion influence things I wrote, and, in something that in hindsight I realize was horribly arrogant on my part, I wrote as if I knew what Google’s motivations were regarding their recent articulations of AI principles. Had I spoken with senior leaders at Google and asked about their motiviations I would have been better poised to write about their intent. But in my arrogance I just made assumptions and wrote about them like I knew what I was talking about. I owe Google (and you) an apology for that. I want this site to be a credible resource and will do better.
I will keep my emotion in the blog, passion drives the site. But will make sure the emotion does not negatively influence the context here. And when I or other authors need to make assumptions we will make it clear when we am doing so.
Regarding Google and their AI and National Security:
While every company in a free country has the right to decide who to work with, it is disapointing to me to see the actions that Google is taking regarding project Maven and in saying they will not pursue use of AI for weapons. In my opinion this this action will hurt the innocent in ways that many at Google might not have an appreciation for.
Upon reflection and with input from a friend I now realize the creation of principles for AI at Google involved inputs and from experienced professionals who know and support DoD and care deeply about the missions. People like that need facts and well reasoned observations to continue to appropriately influence decisions. I should make it easier on people like that by arming them with facts, not shooting pot shots from the peanut gallery.
So, it is pretty clear that if I want to be listened to by Google and other strong players in AI regarding national security I need to articulate my views with less arrogance, more logic, and and more facts. That is what we will do here.