Dr. Andrew McAfee Video by Ken Gonzalez https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh Reactions and Insights en-us 2017-10-16 22:26:01 UTC 2017-10-25 20:31:57 UTC hello@padlet.com Contribute a comment (paragraph) AFTER you watched Dr. Andrew McAfee's video, include your name at the end. kgonzalez8 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/197590268 Dr. Gonzalez

I find it interesting that Dr. McAfee touched on many of the same things I did in my initial comment, made prior to watching the video. He discussed better access to resources, improved health, and better communication. On the other hand, I think he is more optimistic than I am in terms of the utilization of artificial intelligence and robotics. I agree that the removal of human error in many things is one of a number of positive things to come from new technology. However, given the reaction of the masses to much of the “information” available today, I am leery of how these things might be used to manipulate people. 
-Jennifer Farace]]> 2017-10-16 22:27:16 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/197590268 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199278623 Dr. McAfee did not allay my fears in his interview. I agree with Farace that he was optimistic about technology, it will greatly improve us in our regular lives and provide greater access to knowledge and communication. However, he did not provide any kind of response or solution as to what will happen to the workforce or the middle class. It was disheartening to hear of the decimation of middle class jobs and a way of life, but those jobs at the "low end of wages that cannot be automated" will still exist, and those at the high end will still exist. With this thinking, it will continue to perpetuate the social inequities that exist, if not exacerbate them and this is where the moral compass of technology is lacking. No social consciousness. This continued support of moving towards our future is not adequately responding or dealing with what is happening to our society at this moment and within the next 20-40 years, as McAfee states, will be when this "pro-business pro-innovation" society leaves a large portion of our own population out in the cold. 
- Pilar Vargas]]> 2017-10-21 15:49:15 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199278623 MSC's Reactions and Insights mspledger https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199282329 When Dr. McAfee said that these innovations in technology are "Good news for all of us, if we leave aside us as workers"--I was thinking well that is a major component to "leave aside". Of course I understand that these advancements will allegedly make life easier and even cheaper for consumers, however if the middle class loses their jobs then they cannot afford to consume. If the most challenged people will be those who engage in "routine work", it implies that we need to encourage students to prepare for fields that still need human-to-human interactions or technology and design fields. This binary of opportunities seems as if it will dramatically limit opportunities for many individuals. I agree with my esteemed colleagues Farace and Pilar in that his excitement and thoughtfulness about international implications was apparent, however is awareness or forthrightness about this will impact the middle class and working poor and solutions to address the potential negative externalities was completely lacking. I would have appreciated a more honest conversation that demonstrates critical thinking by including multiple perspectives and sentiments regarding these technological advancements. The future does need to be protected from the past, however I am not convinced that technology innovation is the panacea. That said, I am wondering if my concerns stem from my own fear of the unknown. I would be more inclined to think about AI in favorable terms if I heard more about the potential downsides and how policy makers, legislators, etc. will address them. Hopefully we will be able to dive into that during this class.

-Michelle Sadrena Clark


]]> 2017-10-21 16:35:06 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199282329 I agree with Dr. McAfee to an extent that the United States does not want to fall behind the global curve with AI, especially when we have the means to remain at the forefront of innovation. But like other cohort members, I too am concerned about its impact to low SES communities who are already struggling to get by with low paying jobs in manufacturing and transportation. We saw what happened to Detroit when the automobile manufacturing industry outsourced its labor abroad. Essentially, this would be another form of outsourcing. I think it’s easy for people like Dr. McAfee to take a position in favor of AI when they have a high skill-set job that isn’t threatened by the prospect of elimination. With AI, we have to look at the subject holistically. An important question to ask is - does it only benefit profit margins? https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199284047 -Christina McKinney]]> 2017-10-21 16:55:44 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199284047 Dr. McAfee https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199288306 The Dr. painted a rosy picture of technology and the need for being in the forefront. He shared about the benefits of these advances such as making products cheaper. It appears that he is downplaying the loss of jobs and the impact that it will have on families. When he talked about drones delivering medical supplies it reminded me of the time I was at the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota protesting the DAPL. There were drones above us and they were not bringing any medical supplies. They were obtaining information on all of us to give to the security personnel so they could neutralize our protest more effectively. I also saw drones over us during a protest at the presidio in old town San Diego right before the police arrived. Thank god for technology. The doctor brought up a number of points until he got to his statement that he is overwhelmingly optimistic that in order to combat global warming we need and we will develop the tools to address it.  
- Stan]]> 2017-10-21 17:54:34 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199288306 Kyle Weinberg https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199289643 The role of government in the US should be to serve the interests of the body populace. Through manipulation of the mechanisms of decision-making, power has been consolidated into the hands of economic elites to an extent maybe not seen since the early 1900s, which sparked the Progressive Era, the rise of unions and mass mobilizations, and eventually legislation that guaranteed rights, protections and benefits to vulnerable populations. There is money to be made from the factors that contribute to climate change and the government is not curbing abuses of technology because they are beholden to the interests that benefit from environmental devastation. This makes me very anxious about how the federal government, particularly the current administration, will legislate adoption of new technologies in the future. Dr. McAfee holds up Uber as an example of a technology that provides resources to those without a regular income. And yet, Uber has resisted efforts to unionize its workers, which would allow them to move beyond the precarious position of independent contractors who buy their own health insurance and are taxed at a higher percentage of their income. “Every system is perfectly designed to get the results it gets.” Technological progress expands access to knowledge and communication but our society is still structured in a way that privileges those with social capital and opportunities to obtain institutional credentials like higher education degrees. Unless our policymakers institute major changes that democratize our institutions and workplaces, my fear is that technological advances will continue to primarily benefit those on the top.]]> 2017-10-21 18:12:05 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199289643 HMM... https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199292802 “Protect the future from the past” is an interesting way think about the advances in technology and AI.  However, I am not sure that is a great explanation for people whose entire careers might be displaced because of automation.  I wonder what the ratio of new jobs created versus service jobs displaced will be?  I also wonder what the impact will be to income inequality will be?  While nobody will disagree that these “advances” will ultimately benefit society as a whole,  I wonder if it will continue to perpetuate the concentration of wealth that has transpired in every major economic revolution?

- MARTIN CASAS]]> 2017-10-21 19:02:31 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199292802 Saving the future from the past jenbrown78 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199300657 This is the phrase that most stood out to me as I listened to this interview. My initial response to AI is a mix between skepticism and concern as I think about the human capital that will be laid aside at the increased use of technology, but this idea of technology being blind to the mistakes of the past provides a fresh perspective for me. While I struggle to imagine how a robot could replace a teacher, especially considering the 10,000 tiny decisions a day that Jim Burke describes teachers making, I wonder how AI could enter a classroom as a tabula rasa, without preconceptions, biases, or baggage. Could there be a space for AI as support mechanisms with students who need reteaching, intervention, acceleration, or other personalization of learning? There will always be a need for a teacher in the classroom as so much of what we do is socioemotional in nature, but I am interested in how we can support teachers and increase the levels of student learning. 
--Medeiros]]> 2017-10-21 21:06:35 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199300657 Self-driving cars, robots, and drones, oh my! One of the statements that stuck with me was when the interviewee stated, "If we leave aside us as workers, tech progress is what we need!" What?! If we leave aside ourselves as workers? How are we going to make money if robots take our jobs? Trump and his followers are worried about people from other countries taking our jobs, but what they need to be worried about is non-human entities taking jobs. He continued to explain that he believes the work taken by robots will be mostly routine work- assembly lines, checkouts, long-haul drivers. At that point, I thought, phew, I am safe in my field, but then he continues to say, robot technology is increasing rapidly and now A.I.'s are at a point where they will be able to listen to people all day and provide advice?! Nooo! That's my job!Realistically, robots and A.I. is beginning to change many industries rapidly. This technological advancement is nothing new- it started with the Industrial Revolution. We will need to, as we always have done, adapt to the new normal. We will need to innovate with our economy and our educational systems to ensure that we are meeting these challenges head-on and ensuring that we are using them to better our society and not destroy it.- Sara Vogel https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199303257 2017-10-21 22:01:46 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199303257 I think I'll do that...or not. https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199307448 The future is an interesting place. Innovation and efficiency may be incredibly exciting for some, but not to others. Watching the video made me think of how innovation is diffused and the process for adopting new technologies. With all the great innovation going on, how do we know people are ready to accept and use it? It also made me think of the “Most Advanced Yet Acceptable” (MAYA) design concept. This theory suggests that revolutionary innovations will have difficulty taking off if they do not include elements of what the market is already familiar with. It seeks to effectively push limits by creating a balance between the future and the past, which is a bit contrary to the notion of choosing to either “protect the past from the future” or vice versa. Even if innovations are created to make life easier and increase equity, how do we ensure that communities will buy into it? A great example is the state of the nation today. Sometimes solutions for a better future seem so clear. But people have a voice in a democracy, and it is apparent that some voices want to build on what makes America great and others want to make America great again.

- Jonathan Penuliar]]> 2017-10-21 23:45:40 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199307448 Uber sucks https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199317388 I definitely echo the feeling that a lot of you have that Dr. McAfee's optimism appears to come without a recognition that major economic changes caused by technological advancement could end up reinforcing structural inequity.  I think it's telling that he brings up Uber as a company that is fighting the past on behalf of the future.  Yes, Uber is a company that uses technologica innovation to revolutionize a very complacent and inefficient industry, but it also happens to deny its drivers the right to unionize and is run by the worst kind of Silicon Valley techbro stereotypes.

I will say, though, that there is a big part of his optimism that I absolutely agree with: humanity has a lot of really big, really difficult problems to solve, and we are not going to solve them by slowing technological advancement.  The only way to survive is to move forward as fast as we can.  I know I don't seem like much of an optimist most of the time, but this is a pretty key part of my personal philosophy and the reason I am passionate about education.  I need to get more kids to and through college so they can fix this dumb planet.

-adam]]> 2017-10-22 04:59:16 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199317388 michellerenee1627 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199321169 I do agree that technology keeps improving. It is amazing that my cell phone can take better pictures than the camera I bought six years ago and do so many other functions besides just taking pictures.  I can’t imagine what it will be like in 20, 30, and 40 years from know.  I’m don’t think ‘the coming of machines’ will be good for everyone.  I’m sure there will be benefits, but with changes and benefits there is also usually some drawbacks.

Michelle Requilman]]> 2017-10-22 06:45:46 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199321169 Reflection from Class Posts: kgonzalez8 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199437888 If I take a step back and consider the themes from your comments, it’s clear that it is impossible to take out bias when it comes to AI.  Everyone working in AI seems to have an agenda. Dr. McAfee clearly has an agenda, so does google, facebook, Amazon, apple.

How do we approach the use of AI in the classroom, given such bias?

Here are some other reactions. 

1) The idea that AI can enter the classroom without preconceptions or biases or baggage is interesting.  However, those who program AI have all of these.  
 
2) There seems to be consensus that AI can have a role in the classroom.  The question of what role still remains.  What is concerning is that many companies are already making that decision – especially Pearson.  
 
3) Critically analyzing the impact of AI is a key goal for this class.  
 
4) The current and potential effect of AI on structural inequity is so important.  Let’s make sure to keep a focus on this.  
 
5) AI and the future of jobs – that’s another key topic for us in this class.
 
6) The consolidation of power and the role of AI is a great insight! Thanks!
 
7)  AI and the manipulation of the populace is another great insight.  An argument could be made that Facebook’s AI Ad feature with Russian manipulation influenced the 2016 elections.  
 
Thank you for your contribution.
 
See you on Tuesday!
 
Dr. G.
]]> 2017-10-23 03:56:29 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/199437888 McAfee is a yes man. Every question the interviewer asked him, he seemed very optimistic about how technology is changing our society at home and abroad. He did not address education which is what I was interested in hearing. When He mentioned doing away with regulations, it became evident that business minds are not always using a social justice framework. Certainly AI and technology can be used to improve access to knowledge and communication for people around the world who live in dire poverty, to eliminate dire poverty and help with health at the bottom. His example of drones in Rwanda and I will add M-PESA in Kenya are good examples to keep in mind. https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/05/economist-explains-18 https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/200608064 I would also critique the power and influence of Silicon Valley in their "philanthropic" motives behind their political and social power that affect all of our social institutions. 
Geneva ]]> 2017-10-25 20:10:46 UTC https://padlet.com/kgonzalez8/qp5zgxft7nuh/wish/200608064