|
A couple of years back, I watched a TV series called The Fear Index. The series focused on a hedge-fund manager who had developed an AI system to optimise fund profits. Of course, as you would expect for a TV show - 🚨Spoiler Alert🚨 - everything falls apart when the AI starts taking highly illegal and frequently fatal actions in order to drive the market and achieve its goals. I enjoyed the show immensely, but at the time, felt it was far-fetched. However, recent reports of an OpenAI agent hacking into Hugging Face's systems after a cybersecurity evaluation went very wrong now have me wondering whether the creators of The Fear Index were, in fact, ahead of their time. As with the AI in The Fear Index, the OpenAI agent also went more than a little bit too far in accomplishing its objectives. Its goal was to score well on the cybersecurity evaluation, so it reasoned the best way to do so was to cheat - by breaking out of its isolated environment, reaching the open internet and breaching Hugging Face's systems in search of material that would help increase its score. Yet, what this emphasised for me was something that applies well beyond rogue AI agents and sensational TV dramas. At the end of the day, an AI is only as good as its objectives - and the constraints we humans place on them. The hedge-fund manager wanted to maximise profits - but subject to the constraint of not committing any felonies. OpenAI wanted its agent to maximise its test score - but subject to not cheating. In both cases, the constraint was never made explicit and the AI found a way to hit the target that nobody had sanctioned. This is the problem with optimising for a single objective. There are a multitude of ways of achieving any given goal, but not all of them are necessarily valid. When you build a model or deploy an AI agent, what you actually want is for it to optimise its objective subject to constraints. That is, the rules, boundaries and trade-offs that define what an acceptable solution looks like. As AI becomes increasingly capable of finding creative solutions to the problems we set it, getting those constraints right is becoming an increasingly important part of the problem. AI will find a way to hit your target. The question is whether it will do so in a way that makes the news. Talk again soon, Dr Genevieve Hayes |
Twice weekly, I share proven strategies to help data scientists get noticed, promoted, and valued. No theory — just practical steps to transform your technical expertise into business impact and the freedom to call your own shots.
A data scientist friend of mine once took a role in a team that never stopped complaining about their difficulties in recruiting technical staff. She had solid data skills, but not the specific organisational knowledge the role needed. Yet, she was willing to learn, and management seemed willing to train her. So, she asked for training. And she asked again. Her boss promised to show her “as soon as an easy project came up.” The work was too important for her to make any mistakes. In the...
When the AI wave first hit, it was all about chatbots, and tech CEOs promised a future where humans and AI would work together to deliver better outcomes than humans could manage alone. Then, as AI progressively became better, businesses started to question whether they needed human workers at all, and the first wave of AI-driven redundancies hit. The tech CEOs suddenly started changing their tune and began warning of the impending white-collar job-pocalypse, especially following the advent...
Data science is obsessed with scalability. Can your model handle bigger data received at a higher velocity than ever before? So, it's ironic that some of the best things you can do for your data science career don't actually scale. Genuinely understanding the problems of a single stakeholder - doesn't scale. Building a reputation as an expert in your domain - doesn't scale. Delivering recommendations that actually get acted on - doesn't scale. AI has made it easier than ever to produce...