You Need a Challenge Network

 Good thought, agreed, always worked best when challenged. 

Why You Need a ‘Challenge Network’  in K@W

In the following excerpt from his new book, Think Again, Wharton management professor Adam Grant explains why success often comes from surrounding ourselves with “disagreeable” people – skeptics who can point out blind spots, question assumptions and help us overcome our weaknesses.

In 2000 Pixar was on fire. Their teams had used computers to rethink animation in their first blockbuster, Toy Story, and they were fresh off of two more smash hits. Yet the company’s founders weren’t content to rest on their laurels. They recruited an outside director named Brad Bird to shake things up. Brad had just released his debut film, which was well-reviewed but flopped in the box office, so he was itching to do something big and bold. When he pitched his vision, the technical leadership at Pixar said it was impossible: They would need a decade and $500 million to make it.

Brad wasn’t ready to give up. He sought out the biggest misfits at Pixar for his project — people who were disagreeable, disgruntled, and dissatisfied. Some called them black sheep. Others called them pirates. When Brad rounded them up, he warned them that no one believed they could pull off the project. Just four years later, his team didn’t just succeed in releasing Pixar’s most complex film ever; they actually managed to lower the cost of production per minute. The Incredibles went on to gross upwards of $631 million worldwide and won the Oscar for best animated feature.  ... "

Assistants and Common Sense

Its actually not too often that assistants speak gibberish, they more often just admit to not knowing what was asked, when a human would understand readily.  That's usually better to diminish risk.  See my previous posts on Common Sense reasoning, which we worked on in the enterprise.  The idea of a challenge is good, it will at least scope the problem in contextual and current terms.   See the examples at the link below.  Also the notes on what 'fundamental limitations' are. 

AI assistants don’t have the common sense to avoid talking gibberish
A new test could prove that when it comes to language, today’s best AI systems are fundamentally limited.   by Will Knight in Technology Review

Siri and Alexa are clearly far from perfect, but there is hope that steady progress in machine learning will turn them into articulate helpers before long. A new test, however, may help show that a fundamentally different approach is required for AI systems to actually master language.

Developed by researchers at the Allen Institute for AI (Ai2), a nonprofit based in Seattle, the Arc Reasoning Challenge (ARC) will pose elementary-school-level multiple-choice science questions. Each question will require some understanding of how the world works.  .... " 

Reasoning with Common Sense

Can we teach machines common sense?  Which points back to our own look at the work Doug Lenat was doing with the Cyc Project. We wanted to create a means by which an agent could understand the basic terminology and goals of an organization like a company, and reason about it with the right language and direction.  That did not happen,  but the goal is still there.   And Cycorp has been active for 34 years, and produced a stable software release just three months ago.  We talked to them back then, but it didn't meet our needs. And every time we make some progress, like our broad use of assistants, now in many homes, we see the need again.

See the Cyc Wikipedia Article.  and

The Limits of Explainability
Academics, economists, and AI researchers often undervalue the role of intuition in science. Here's why they're wrong.
by Joi Ito in Wired ....

Paul Allen Wants to Teach Machines Common Sense 
By Cade Metz in the NYT. .... "