What do human intelligence, killer robots, and cloud algorithms have in common?
Primarily they require humans to sort, organize, and manipulate data, whether that data is generated by sensors or internal processes in which humans have no input.
For much of the world, most programmers spend their day creating new programs or working with data, never having to interact with machine intelligence directly.
Solve this problem and humans can better understand and harness the power of data as they relate to solving a complex problem.
The challenge in implementing this sort of a model for making intelligent decisions involves building an effective “commons” of interconnected data and creating a way to make sense of it.
While a lot of the world is still living in the world that allowed the invention of wheels, airplanes, and working computers in the early 1900s, software still remains rudimentary compared to machines.
Modern technology has developed to the point where applying machine intelligence to create machines that use it for specific purpose (for example, cars, airplanes, space travel, etc.) is now possible.
This is what John Waldron spoke about in the controversial book, The Intelligence Equation, written by Greg Ip.
Currently, billions of people are employed in occupations in which they have no input into the process of how data is being generated, how it is being sorted, collected, and organized into meaningful information.
While some workers produce their own data through object recognition and some work at the behest of IT professionals to take in and sort data, for the most part, data collection remains a human effort.
A few short years ago a group of coders had the same problem and realized that the underlying idea of sorting and organizing information was probably a better approach than building a massive data warehouse in order to gather data.
It is a bit like rearranging a jigsaw puzzle without the images of the pieces in front of you. (Remember that those always left out of a puzzle will never fit again.)
Primo Lanman and his team of mathematicians at Clearview launched an initiative to try to make sense of information out of data it had never before seen or understood.
Ahead of its time
Over the last few years, Clearview has released a number of experiments in software analytics and machine learning. They were at the forefront of developing a large-scale dataset for natural language processing.
It was in this data set that it solved some technical problems that had never been solved before and began to create new algorithms.
But not long after, some Clearview employees turned their attention to the legal world.
It’s a legal question about a person’s freedom to behave in a particular way, or even just run around freely. If a data set can identify the individual who was involved in a particular crime, will that interfere with the defendant’s freedom to enjoy her freedom, and thus the freedom of society?
Lanman and his team have argued that putting a time limit on our rights would inhibit a society that relies on the rule of law.
Citing their experience at Clearview, Lanman wrote an opinion piece on the subject last September, titled, “Legal system harms society by not treating people like people.”
What Lanman and his team at Clearview originally set out to create an intelligence puzzle, they have created a software system that can be applied to various datasets like a gaming arcade, and only confirm or discount law enforcement investigations from across the country.
The system will then analyze the data and tell you if the charge was eventually dropped or not.
Information Management System
Clearview was at a city council meeting last month in Colorado Springs. There they revealed their next-generation information management system, EC3.
For years there has been some debate about how governments classify crimes. The types of crimes that fall into what we call a “crime rate” — defined as the offenses that results in the most criminal liability.
This is an important distinction because different offenses sometimes generate more, or less, criminals than our core classification.
This means that the defense lawyers at work in the criminal system may be able to slow down a process that is otherwise only as fast as the human brain wants it to be.
The intelligence puzzle has been a thorn in the side of law enforcement for more than a century. Is it too simple to say that criminals should have no rights?
We have not seen the release of a communication sent by someone involved in a crime — including a copy of a statement, audio tapes, and video surveillance — before in which the police have no access to it. This is very new in a global reality.
Being able to see what actually occurred allows us to have the conversation, which can only benefit