Between Posts

I don't know if the folks at the consulting powerhouse PWC coined the terminology "Agentic AI" or if they merely picked it up elsewhere as a sub-topic of the many general AI conversations being had these days, but a PWC article is where I first became acquainted with this new terminology, thus I will aim my guns specifically at PWC, with the entire evolving AI industry also in my sights. The PWC article begs the questions: Do humans themselves possess autonomous agency? And would not the article have been better served if the idea of autonomy had been kept out of the conversation? I ask these questions while realizing that "autonomy" long has occupied the discussions of workplace theorists and historians as that word (autonomy) has been applied to workers of the human variety, making it inevitable that the issue of autonomy would worm its way into AI discussions. Regarding the first question, anyone trying to answer will, if thinking about the question more tha...

  REMEMBER IQ TESTS? Stick with me here for a minute or two.  One of the (if not the main) reasons I shy away from Artificial Intelligence (AI) (which is not even a real thing, but that is another discussion) is because, unlike the woke crowd, I don't reject completely the legitimacy of IQ tests. That having been said, it stands to reason that AI will always reflect the breadth, width, depth and sources of learning of the various individuals who are developing the AI programs (i.e., their IQ's).  (And by the way, does it not bother people that multiple AI programs and models are being developed, thereby suggesting that there are many types of intelligence around any particular topic?)   In short, AI will always reflect the collective IQ's of its developers. And I would venture to say that it will also reflect the EQ's (Emotional Quotient) of its developers. The key idea here is when I mentioned the breadth, width, depth and sources of learning of each AI develop...