Friendly artificial intelligence (friendly AI or FAI) is hypothetical artificial general intelligence (AGI) that would have a positive (benign) effect on humanity or at least align with human interests such as fostering the improvement of the human species. It is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence and is closely related to machine ethics. While machine ethics is concerned with how an artificially intelligent agent should behave, friendly artificial intelligence research is focused on how to practically bring about this behavior and ensuring it is adequately constrained. == Etymology and usage == The term was coined by Eliezer Yudkowsky, who is best known for popularizing the idea, to discuss superintelligent artificial agents that reliably implement human values. Stuart J. Russell and Peter Norvig's leading artificial intelligence textbook, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, describes the idea: Yudkowsky (2008) goes into more detail about how to design a Friendly AI. He asserts that friendliness (a desire not to harm humans) should be designed in from the start, but that the designers should recognize both that their own designs may be flawed, and that the robot will learn and evolve over time. Thus the challenge is one of mechanism design—to define a mechanism for evolving AI systems under a system of checks and balances, and to give the systems utility functions that will remain friendly in the face of such changes. "Friendly" is used in this context as technical terminology, and picks out agents that are safe and useful, not necessarily ones that are "friendly" in the colloquial sense. The concept is primarily invoked in the context of discussions of recursively self-improving artificial agents that rapidly explode in intelligence, on the grounds that this hypothetical technology would have a large, rapid, and difficult-to-control impact on human society. == Risks of unfriendly AI == The roots of concern about artificial intelligence are very old. Kevin LaGrandeur showed that the dangers specific to AI can be seen in ancient literature concerning artificial humanoid servants such as the golem, or the proto-robots of Gerbert of Aurillac and Roger Bacon. In those stories, the extreme intelligence and power of these humanoid creations clash with their status as slaves (which by nature are seen as sub-human), and cause disastrous conflict. By 1942 these themes prompted Isaac Asimov to create the "Three Laws of Robotics"—principles hard-wired into all the robots in his fiction, intended to prevent them from turning on their creators, or allowing them to come to harm. In modern times as the prospect of superintelligent AI looms nearer, philosopher Nick Bostrom has said that superintelligent AI systems with goals that are not aligned with human ethics are intrinsically dangerous unless extreme measures are taken to ensure the safety of humanity. He put it this way: Basically we should assume that a 'superintelligence' would be able to achieve whatever goals it has. Therefore, it is extremely important that the goals we endow it with, and its entire motivation system, is 'human friendly.' In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky called for the creation of "friendly AI" to mitigate existential risk from advanced artificial intelligence. He explains: "The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." Steve Omohundro says that a sufficiently advanced AI system will, unless explicitly counteracted, exhibit a number of basic "drives", such as resource acquisition, self-preservation, and continuous self-improvement, because of the intrinsic nature of any goal-driven systems and that these drives will, "without special precautions", cause the AI to exhibit undesired behavior. Alexander Wissner-Gross says that AIs driven to maximize their future freedom of action (or causal path entropy) might be considered friendly if their planning horizon is longer than a certain threshold, and unfriendly if their planning horizon is shorter than that threshold. Luke Muehlhauser, writing for the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, recommends that machine ethics researchers adopt what Bruce Schneier has called the "security mindset": Rather than thinking about how a system will work, imagine how it could fail. For instance, he suggests even an AI that only makes accurate predictions and communicates via a text interface might cause unintended harm. In 2014, Luke Muehlhauser and Nick Bostrom underlined the need for 'friendly AI'; nonetheless, the difficulties in designing a 'friendly' superintelligence, for instance via programming counterfactual moral thinking, are considerable. == Coherent extrapolated volition == Yudkowsky advances the Coherent Extrapolated Volition (CEV) model. According to him, our coherent extrapolated volition is "our wish if we knew more, thought faster, were more the people we wished we were, had grown up farther together; where the extrapolation converges rather than diverges, where our wishes cohere rather than interfere; extrapolated as we wish that extrapolated, interpreted as we wish that interpreted". Rather than a Friendly AI being designed directly by human programmers, it is to be designed by a "seed AI" programmed to first study human nature and then produce the AI that humanity would want, given sufficient time and insight, to arrive at a satisfactory answer. The appeal to an objective through contingent human nature (perhaps expressed, for mathematical purposes, in the form of a utility function or other decision-theoretic formalism), as providing the ultimate criterion of "Friendliness", is an answer to the meta-ethical problem of defining an objective morality; extrapolated volition is intended to be what humanity objectively would want, all things considered, but it can only be defined relative to the psychological and cognitive qualities of present-day, unextrapolated humanity. == Other approaches == Steve Omohundro has proposed a "scaffolding" approach to AI safety, in which one provably safe AI generation helps build the next provably safe generation. Seth Baum argues that the development of safe, socially beneficial artificial intelligence or artificial general intelligence is a function of the social psychology of AI research communities and so can be constrained by extrinsic measures and motivated by intrinsic measures. Intrinsic motivations can be strengthened when messages resonate with AI developers; Baum argues that, in contrast, "existing messages about beneficial AI are not always framed well". Baum advocates for "cooperative relationships, and positive framing of AI researchers" and cautions against characterizing AI researchers as "not want(ing) to pursue beneficial designs". In his book Human Compatible, AI researcher Stuart J. Russell lists three principles to guide the development of beneficial machines. He emphasizes that these principles are not meant to be explicitly coded into the machines; rather, they are intended for the human developers. The principles are as follows: The machine's only objective is to maximize the realization of human preferences. The machine is initially uncertain about what those preferences are. The ultimate source of information about human preferences is human behavior. The "preferences" Russell refers to "are all-encompassing; they cover everything you might care about, arbitrarily far into the future." Similarly, "behavior" includes any choice between options, and the uncertainty is such that some probability, which may be quite small, must be assigned to every logically possible human preference. == Public policy == James Barrat, author of Our Final Invention, suggested that "a public-private partnership has to be created to bring A.I.-makers together to share ideas about security—something like the International Atomic Energy Agency, but in partnership with corporations." He urges AI researchers to convene a meeting similar to the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA, which discussed risks of biotechnology. John McGinnis encourages governments to accelerate friendly AI research. Because the goalposts of friendly AI are not necessarily eminent, he suggests a model similar to the National Institutes of Health, where "Peer review panels of computer and cognitive scientists would sift through projects and choose those that are designed both to advance AI and assure that such advances would be accompanied by appropriate safeguards." McGinnis feels that peer review is better "than regulation to address technical issues that are not possible to capture through bureaucratic mandates". McGinnis notes that his proposal stands in contrast to that of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, which generally aims to avoid government involvement in friendly AI. == Criticism == Some critics believe that both human-level AI and superintelligence are unlikely and that, therefore, friendly AI is unlik
Inception (deep learning architecture)
Inception is a family of convolutional neural network (CNN) for computer vision, introduced by researchers at Google in 2014 as GoogLeNet (later renamed Inception v1). The series was historically important as an early CNN that separates the stem (data ingest), body (data processing), and head (prediction), an architectural design that persists in all modern CNN. == Version history == === Inception v1 === In 2014, a team at Google developed the GoogLeNet architecture, an instance of which won the ImageNet Large-Scale Visual Recognition Challenge 2014 (ILSVRC14). The name came from the LeNet of 1998, since both LeNet and GoogLeNet are CNNs. They also called it "Inception" after a "we need to go deeper" internet meme, a phrase from Inception (2010) the film. Because later, more versions were released, the original Inception architecture was renamed again as "Inception v1". The models and the code were released under Apache 2.0 license on GitHub. The Inception v1 architecture is a deep CNN composed of 22 layers. Most of these layers were "Inception modules". The original paper stated that Inception modules are a "logical culmination" of Network in Network and (Arora et al, 2014). Since Inception v1 is deep, it suffered from the vanishing gradient problem. The team solved it by using two "auxiliary classifiers", which are linear-softmax classifiers inserted at 1/3-deep and 2/3-deep within the network, and the loss function is a weighted sum of all three: L = 0.3 L a u x , 1 + 0.3 L a u x , 2 + L r e a l {\displaystyle L=0.3L_{aux,1}+0.3L_{aux,2}+L_{real}} These were removed after training was complete. This was later solved by the ResNet architecture. The architecture consists of three parts stacked on top of one another: The stem (data ingestion): The first few convolutional layers perform data preprocessing to downscale images to a smaller size. The body (data processing): The next many Inception modules perform the bulk of data processing. The head (prediction): The final fully-connected layer and softmax produces a probability distribution for image classification. This structure is used in most modern CNN architectures. === Inception v2 === Inception v2 was released in 2015, in a paper that is more famous for proposing batch normalization. It had 13.6 million parameters. It improves on Inception v1 by adding batch normalization, and removing dropout and local response normalization which they found became unnecessary when batch normalization is used. === Inception v3 === Inception v3 was released in 2016. It improves on Inception v2 by using factorized convolutions. As an example, a single 5×5 convolution can be factored into 3×3 stacked on top of another 3×3. Both has a receptive field of size 5×5. The 5×5 convolution kernel has 25 parameters, compared to just 18 in the factorized version. Thus, the 5×5 convolution is strictly more powerful than the factorized version. However, this power is not necessarily needed. Empirically, the research team found that factorized convolutions help. It also uses a form of dimension-reduction by concatenating the output from a convolutional layer and a pooling layer. As an example, a tensor of size 35 × 35 × 320 {\displaystyle 35\times 35\times 320} can be downscaled by a convolution with stride 2 to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} , and by maxpooling with pool size 2 × 2 {\displaystyle 2\times 2} to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} . These are then concatenated to 17 × 17 × 640 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 640} . Other than this, it also removed the lowest auxiliary classifier during training. They found that the auxiliary head worked as a form of regularization. They also proposed label-smoothing regularization in classification. For an image with label c {\displaystyle c} , instead of making the model to predict the probability distribution δ c = ( 0 , 0 , … , 0 , 1 ⏟ c -th entry , 0 , … , 0 ) {\displaystyle \delta _{c}=(0,0,\dots ,0,\underbrace {1} _{c{\text{-th entry}}},0,\dots ,0)} , they made the model predict the smoothed distribution ( 1 − ϵ ) δ c + ϵ / K {\displaystyle (1-\epsilon )\delta _{c}+\epsilon /K} where K {\displaystyle K} is the total number of classes. === Inception v4 === In 2017, the team released Inception v4, Inception ResNet v1, and Inception ResNet v2. Inception v4 is an incremental update with even more factorized convolutions, and other complications that were empirically found to improve benchmarks. Inception ResNet v1 and v2 are both modifications of Inception v4, where residual connections are added to each Inception module, inspired by the ResNet architecture. === Xception === Xception ("Extreme Inception") was published in 2017. It is a linear stack of depthwise separable convolution layers with residual connections. The design was proposed on the hypothesis that in a CNN, the cross-channels correlations and spatial correlations in the feature maps can be entirely decoupled. Training each network took 3 days on 60 K80 GPUs, or approximately 0.5 petaFLOP-days.
Webmail
Webmail (or web-based email) is an email service that can be accessed using a standard web browser. It contrasts with email service accessible through a specialised email client software. Additionally, many internet service providers (ISP) provide webmail as part of their internet service package. Similarly, some web hosting providers also provide webmail as a part of their hosting package. As with any web application, webmail's main advantage over the use of a desktop email client is the ability to send and receive email anywhere from a web browser. == History == === Early implementations === The first Web Mail implementation was developed at CERN in 1993 by Phillip Hallam-Baker as a test of the HTTP protocol stack, but was not developed further. In the next two years, however, several people produced working webmail applications. In Europe, there were three implementations, Søren Vejrum's "WWW Mail", Luca Manunza's "WebMail", and Remy Wetzels' "WebMail". Søren Vejrum's "WWW Mail" was written when he was studying and working at the Copenhagen Business School in Denmark, and was released on February 28, 1995. Luca Manunza's "WebMail" was written while he was working at CRS4 in Sardinia, from an idea of Gianluigi Zanetti, with the first source release on March 30, 1995. Remy Wetzels' "WebMail" was written while he was studying at the Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands for the DSE and was released early January 1995. In the United States, Matt Mankins wrote "Webex", and Bill Fitler, while at Lotus cc:Mail, began working on an implementation which he demonstrated publicly at Lotusphere on January 24, 1995. Customers who saw the cc:Mail demonstration were very enthusiastic, one recalling that they were "like an angry mob. People were yelling, 'We want this now!'". Matt Mankins, under the supervision of Dr. Burt Rosenberg at the University of Miami, released his "Webex" application source code in a post to comp.mail.misc on August 8, 1995, although it had been in use as the primary email application at the School of Architecture where Mankins worked for some months prior. Bill Fitler's webmail implementation was further developed as a commercial product, which Lotus announced and released in the fall of 1995 as cc:Mail for the World Wide Web 1.0; thereby providing an alternative means of accessing a cc:Mail message store (the usual means being a cc:Mail desktop application that operated either via dialup or within the confines of a local area network). Early commercialization of webmail was also achieved when "Webex" began to be sold by Mankins' company, DotShop, Inc., at the end of 1995. Within DotShop, "Webex" changed its name to "EMUmail"; which would be sold to companies like UPS and Rackspace until its sale to Accurev in 2001. EMUmail was one of the first applications to feature a free version that included embedded advertising, as well as a licensed version that did not. Hotmail and Four11's RocketMail both launched in 1996 as free services and immediately became very popular. === Widespread deployment === As the 1990s progressed, and into the 2000s, it became more common for the general public to have access to webmail because: many Internet service providers (such as EarthLink) and web hosting providers (such as Verio) began bundling webmail into their service offerings (often in parallel with POP/SMTP services); many other enterprises (such as universities and large corporations) also started offering webmail as a way for their user communities to access their email (either locally managed or outsourced); webmail service providers (such as Hotmail and RocketMail) emerged in 1996 as a free service to the general public, and rapidly gained in popularity. In some cases, webmail application software is developed in-house by the organizations running and managing the application, and in some cases it is obtained from software companies that develop and sell such applications, usually as part of an integrated mail server package (an early example being Netscape Messaging Server). The market for webmail application software has continued into the 2010s. == Rendering and compatibility == Email users may find the use of both a webmail client and a desktop client using the POP3 protocol presents some difficulties. For example, email messages that are downloaded by the desktop client and are removed from the server will no longer be available on the webmail client. The user is limited to previewing messages using the web client before they are downloaded by the desktop email client. However, one may choose to leave the emails on the server, in which case this problem does not occur. The use of both a webmail client and a desktop client using the IMAP4 protocol allows the contents of the mailbox to be consistently displayed in both the webmail and desktop clients and any action the user performs on messages in one interface will be reflected when the email is accessed via the other interface. There are significant differences in rendering capabilities for many popular webmail services such as Gmail, Outlook.com and Yahoo! Mail. Due to the varying treatment of HTML tags, such as