What I Learned Today

We are still figuring out how best to interact with AI systems, and how we want them to behave towards us.

A study addressing that question just came out: “Autonomy or Guidance: What Users Want from AI versus Human Advisors” by Yasmin Wiesenfeld and Oded Nov.

The researchers assessed human preferences for how much guidance versus autonomy they want when getting advice about health and finance, from a human expert vs. an AI system. They found that people prefer “complete agency” (just give me the options) from an AI but “guided agency” (give me options plus your recommendation) from a human, “suggesting that people assign different normative roles to AI and human experts.”

Having different preferences makes sense if you have a different mental model of the expertise, reliability, and capabilities of different conversation partners. This deviation suggests that there persists a gap in how people view generative AI chatbot capabilities, compared to a human expert.

This paragraph in the Discussion adds an extra twist (and concern):

However, research suggests that when AI systems are anthropomorphized, this trust gap is reduced: although users are significantly more likely to follow advice from a human (e.g., romantic partner) than AI, this difference is nearly eliminated when the AI is anthropomorphized [19]. This suggests that perceptions of AI’s role as an advisor may be malleable through design choices that emphasize human-like qualities, even if they do not affect the level of user autonomy.

Without a doubt, generative AI creators already knew and have been exploiting this tendency. The original GPT language model could have been released as just a language model, which researchers would have continued using to analyze and process language. Instead, the choice was made to personify the model by making it into a chatbot that uses the pronoun “I”.

And finally, I found this bit very intriguing:

However, the findings also raise a normative question: should AI systems reflect users’ stated preferences (what people claim to want in hypothetical scenarios), or their revealed preferences (what they choose in practice)? Despite overwhelming preference for agency-preserving designs in this study, many people continue to employ agentic AI systems that make decisions for them.

We will probably never crack the mystery of “why do people do things at odds with what they say they want?” — but some of that is what makes us interesting personalities ourselves. Still, for AI system designers, this is an important point to reflect on, since choices have to be made to enable the creation of any system in the real world.

Recently I got to experiment with USPS’s Media Mail. I shipped myself some books during a move and paid just $10 for a 7-lb package. Today I shipped a book to a friend (15.70 oz) which was $4.63, the starting price for any Media Mail. It would have been $13.45 to ship via Priority Mail or $9.00 by Ground Advantage.

What counts as Media Mail? Basically anything readable (books but nothing with advertising in it) or watchable (DVDs, film, VHS) or listenable (CDs, tapes, albums, player piano rolls (!!)). Here is the official specification of Media Mail. I also found this handy, much more readable chart, although it is from 2013 so I would welcome learning if there is any update out there.

I did run into a snag. The specification and chart say you can include a personal note or card with the item. When I presented my package for mailing, the clerk asked if I had a card inside. I cheerfully said yes. She then charged me an additional $0.73 for the first-class postage for that card. I noted that it was supposed to be included in the Media Mail charge. She said it had to be an “add on”. I noted it was a postcard so at least I should get the postcard rate. Nope.

At home, I looked again at the specification, which states:

6.4 Incidental First-Class Mail Attachments and Enclosures
Incidental First-Class Mail matter may be enclosed in or attached to any Media Mail or Library Mail piece without payment of First-Class Mail postage. An incidental First-Class Mail attachment or enclosure must be matter that, if mailed separately, would require First-Class Mail postage, is closely associated with but secondary to the host piece, and is prepared so as not to interfere with postal processing. An incidental First-Class Mail attachment or enclosure may be a bill for the product or publication, a statement of account for past products or publications, or a personal message or greeting included with a product, publication, or parcel. (my italics)

I support the USPS and I have no desire to harass them, but this is irritating. I paid more for this shipment than if I’d sent the postcard separately, and by their own rules, it should not have had an additional charge at all. Next time I’ll bring a printout of the spec with me. An education opportunity!

I took some time to investigate the history of blacks in Oregon, and what I found was eye-opening. In 1844, the then-territory of Oregon passed a law banning slavery. To modern eyes this may seem quite progressive, until you read the rest of the law and it becomes clear that this was not a statement about the ills and injustice of slavery, but rather an effort to rid the state of black people. In addition to banning slavery, the law also prohibited blacks from entering the state. Those who entered anyway could be whipped “upon his or her bare back not less than twenty nor more than thirty-nine stripes”, every six months until they left. The law was repealed the next year, but other “exclusion bills” followed.

In 1857, Oregon joined the United States and became the only state to do so with a clause in its state constitution to specifically exclude blacks. The Oregon Constitution banned slavery and prevented blacks from legally residing in the state, or owning property, voting, etc. Oregon also rescinded (took back) its ratification of the 14th amendment (which gave all native-born Americans citizenship, including blacks) in 1869 and voted against the 15h amendment (to give blacks voting rights) in 1869. It did not ratify the 15th amendment until 1959 (!) and the 14th in 1973 (!!).

Oregon continues to have a small black population – about 2%. That rarity can create its own problems. I found this very thought-provoking:

“Because exclusion policies served to keep minority numbers low, racial discrimination has not been evident to white Oregonians and many outsiders… Perhaps that is why Oregonians have a special problem with race-blindness: it tends to afflict most those who are unaccustomed to seeing themselves in racial terms.” from Race, Politics, and Denial: Why Oregon Forgot to Ratify the Fourteenth Amendment by Cheryl A. Brooks (2005)

And maybe this contributes to not only ignorance, but also violence. Given the recent murder of George Floyd, it was chilling to come across this passage:

“One such case occurred in 1985, when Lloyd Stevenson, a black man, was killed by a policeman using a choke hold. Neither of the two officers involved was disciplined. The case took a bizarre and controversial turn when on the day of Stevenson’s funeral, two police officers sold t-shirts to fellow officers bearing the slogan “Don’t Choke ‘Em, Smoke ‘Em.” They were fired but were eventually reinstated with back pay.” from Blacks in Oregon by Darrell Milner (2019)

There is so much more to learn and so much more to do. And of course it is not just about Oregon. I am grieving for this history and for our present day. Unlike a virus that jumped species and attacked us from the outside, racism is something that we created. We did it to ourselves. That makes us responsible. And that also means it is an opportunity, because we control our actions and how we want the future to be. We get to choose.

Did you know that there’s a gigantic concentration of trash that’s swirling around between California and Hawaii? The “Great Pacific Garbage Patch” is a stunning conglomeration of trash that is now reputed to cover an area twice the size of Texas, or possibly three times the size of France. Appalling!

Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Fascinating video about how they measure the volume of trash:

I recently listened to another fascinating episode of the “Science Vs” podcast titled “Plastics: The Final Straw?”. The tale of where our plastics go and what havoc they wreak is not for the faint-hearted. The show also discusses a question that had puzzled me a bit – how could that much plastic possibly end up in the ocean? Apparently, much of it is trash that folks drop in a street gutter, and then washes into a storm drain, which may at times bypass wastewater treatment (or be in a community that lacks it) and get expelled directly into the ocean.

There are efforts underway to try to clean up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, thankfully. But I couldn’t get the idea of that trash out of my mind. And so on my next evening walk, I took a leftover grocery bag and my grabber tool with me:

(This isn’t my exact tool but you get the idea.)

And as I walked, I used it to pick up any trash I found on the street and put it in my bag. In half an hour of walking, I filled the bag TWICE! (I was able to dump it halfway through in an actual garbage can.) Again, appalling!

It was also fascinating to see what kind of trash was on the street. Our streets are actually quite clean, with weekly street sweepers coming through. I found the densest concentration of trash when I passed near the middle school :( And by far, overall, the biggest trash constituent was plastics. I collected a paper plate, a crushed soda can, and some napkins, but the huge majority was plastic cups, lids, straws, chip bags, food wrappers, etc. (I also found part of a pair of novelty sunglasses (plastic) and a pencil (not plastic).) In many cases, the items were near to or partly sucked into a storm drain already. The whole time, all I could think of was that mountain of trash in the ocean, and how unnecessary and avoidable it is.

But now, at least, I can tidy up the streets on my way to tidy up the library shelves. :)

Here’s a neat idea – use composting techniques to take care of our own dead bodies.

In this TED talk, Katrina Spade makes a compelling argument for a new way of managing the corpse part of dying. I’ve long been a fan of cremation over burial, for the reasons she explains, but she also makes good points about the downside of how cremation consumes a lot of energy and generates, effectively, human ash pollution.

The idea of “re-composing” bodies, in ways that allow your molecules to be broken down and eventually used to nurture new life, is refreshing! I also like the idea that bereaved family and friends can have whatever kind of ceremony they like as part of the send-off of the body. For those who like to visit gravesites in remembrance of those who are gone, why not designate a location of positive memories with the deceased (a favorite beach or park, or the site of a graduation or wedding proposal or other significant event), or even have a shrine set aside inside the home (I’ve always liked this idea anyway).

Wired wrote an article about this last year that contains some diagrams about how the envisioned recomposition center would look and operate: Inside the Machine that will turn your Corpse into Compost

And for the current status of the project, check out Urban Death Project (a slightly more creepy name than “Urban Recomposer” or other alternatives). They already demonstrated success in composting six cadavers, and it looks like they are starting the next pilot project this month. This will be fascinating to follow!