Can a quantum strategy help bring down the house?
Study finds quantum entanglement could, in principle, give a slight advantage in the game of blackjack.
04 August, 2020
Photo by Sheri Hooley on Unsplash
In some versions of the game blackjack, one way to win against the house is for players at the table to work as a team to keep track of and covertly communicate amongst each other the cards they have been dealt.
<p> With that knowledge, they can then estimate the cards still in the deck, and those most likely to be dealt out next, all to help each player decide how to place their bets, and as a team, gain an advantage over the dealer.</p><p>This calculating strategy, known as card-counting, was made famous by the MIT Blackjack Team, a group of students from MIT, Harvard University, and Caltech, who for several decades starting in 1979, optimized card-counting and other techniques to successfully beat casinos at blackjack around the world — a story that later inspired the book "Bringing Down the House."</p><p>Now researchers at MIT and Caltech have shown that the weird, quantum effects of entanglement could theoretically give blackjack players even more of an edge, albeit a small one, when playing against the house.</p><p>In a paper published this week in the journal <em>Physical Review A</em>, the researchers lay out a theoretical scenario in which two players, playing cooperatively against the dealer, can better coordinate their strategies using a quantumly entangled pair of systems. Such systems exist now in the laboratory, although not in forms convenient for any practical use in casinos. In their study, the authors nevertheless explore the theoretical possibilities for how a quantum system might influence outcomes in blackjack.</p><p>They found that such quantum communication would give the players a slight advantage compared to classical card-counting strategies, though in limited situations where the number of cards left in the dealer's deck is low.</p><p>"It's pretty small in terms of the actual magnitude of the expected quantum advantage," says first author Joseph Lin, a former graduate student at MIT. "But if you imagine the players are extremely rich, and the deck is really low in number, so that every card counts, these small advantages can be big. The exciting result is that there's some advantage to quantum communication, regardless of how small it is."</p><p>Lin's MIT co-authors on the paper are professor of physics Joseph Formaggio, associate professor of physics Aram Harrow, and Anand Natarajan of Caltech, who will start at MIT in September as assistant professor of electrical engineering and computer science.</p>
<h3>Quantum dealings</h3><p>Entanglement is a phenomenon described by the rules of quantum mechanics, which states that two physically separate objects can be "entangled," or correlated with each other, in such a way that the correlations between them are stronger than what would be predicted by the classical laws of physics and probability.</p><p>In 1964, physicist John Bell proved mathematically that quantum entanglement could exist, and also devised a test — known a Bell test — that scientists have since applied to many scenarios to ascertain if certain spatially remote particles or systems behave according to classical, real-world physics, or whether they may exhibit some quantum, entangled states.</p><p>"One motivation for this work was as a concrete realization of the Bell test," says Harrow of the team's new paper. "People wrote the rules of blackjack not thinking of entanglement. But the players are dealt cards, and there are some correlations between the cards they get. So does entanglement work here? The answer to the question was not obvious going into it."</p><p>After casually entertaining the idea during a regular poker night with friends, Formaggio decided to explore the possibility of quantum blackjack more formally with his MIT colleagues.</p><p>"I was grateful to them for not laughing and closing the door on me when I brought up the idea," Formaggio recalls.</p>
<h3>Correlated cards</h3><p>In blackjack, the dealer deals herself and each player a face-up card that is public to all, and a face-down card. With this information, each player decides whether to "hit," and be dealt another card, or "stand," and stay with the cards they have. The goal after one round is to have a hand with a total that is closer to 21, without going over, than the dealer and the other players at the table.</p><p>In their paper, the researchers simulated a simple blackjack setup involving two players, Alice and Bob, playing cooperatively against the dealer. They programmed Alice to consistently bet low, with the main objective of helping Bob, who could hit or stand based on any information he gained from Alice.</p><p>The researchers considered how three different scenarios might help the players win over the dealer: a classical card-counting scenario without communication; a best-case scenario in which Alice simply shows Bob her face-down card, demonstrating the best that a team can do in playing against the dealer; and lastly, a quantum entanglement scenario.</p><p>In the quantum scenario, the researchers formulated a mathematical model to represent a quantum system, which can be thought of abstractedly as a box with many "buttons," or measurement choices, that is shared between Alice and Bob.</p><p>For instance, if Alice's face-down card is a 5, she can push a particular button on the quantum box and use its output to inform her usual choice of whether to hit or stand. Bob, in turn, looks at his face-down card when deciding which button to push on his quantum box, as well as whether to use the box at all. In the cases where Bob uses his quantum box, he can combine its output with his observation of Alice's strategy to decide his own move. This extra information — not exactly the value of Alice's card, but more information than a random guess — can help Bob decide whether to hit or stand.</p>
<p>The researchers ran all three scenarios, with many combinations of cards between each player and the dealer, and with increasing number of cards left in the dealer's deck, to see how often Alice and Bob could win against the dealer.</p><p>After running thousands of rounds for each of the three scenarios, they found that the players had a slight advantage over the dealer in the quantum entanglement scenario, compared with the classical card-counting strategy, though only when a handful of cards were left in the dealer's deck.</p><p>"As you increase the deck and therefore increase all the possibilities of different cards coming to you, the fact that you know a little bit more through this quantum process actually gets diluted," Formaggio explains.</p><p>Nevertheless, Harrow notes that "it was surprising that these problems even matched, that it even made sense to consider entangled strategy in blackjack."</p><p>Do these results mean that future blackjack teams might use quantum strategies to their advantage?</p><p>"It would require a very large investor, and my guess is, carrying a quantum computer in your backpack will probably tip the house," Formaggio says. "We think casinos are safe right now from this particular threat."</p><p>This research was funded, in part, by the National Science Foundation, the Army Research Office, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the MIT Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP).</p><p>Reprinted with permission of <a href="http://news.mit.edu/" target="_blank">MIT News</a>. Read the <a href="http://news.mit.edu/2020/quantum-blackjack-0803" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
4 key questions to challenge your views on genetic engineering
New research shows how Americans feel about genetic engineering, human enhancement and automation.
23 February, 2020
Adobe stock.
- A review of Pew Research studies reveals the views of Americans on the role of science in society.
- 4 key questions were asked to gauge feelings on genetic engineering, automation and human enhancement.
- Americans are split in how they view technology and many worry about its growing role.
<p><br></p></div>
<p>The Pew Research Center published a fascinating roundup of studies that revealed the opinions of the U.S. public on a number of key science-related issues. The researchers wanted to find out what people thought overall about the role of science and scientists in society, but also to see more specifically how far modern humans are willing to go with genetic engineering and automation. </p><p>The <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/12/key-findings-about-americans-confidence-in-science-and-their-views-on-scientists-role-in-society/" target="_blank">responses show</a> that people are generally not as worried as you'd think about messing with human genetics but when it comes to implanting technology to enhance bodies, doubts proliferate. A strong uneasiness also pervades responses dealing with robots in workplaces. </p><p>Before you know the details of what others thought, however, you have a chance to take the quiz yourself to test your own points of view on these matters.</p>
<p>These first two questions relate to your stance on <strong>genetic engineering. </strong>With the advent of CRISPR gene editing techniques, it now seems possible to edit out mutations and create babies without disease. Wouldn't you want to do it? Or do you see the potential for horrendous accidents, genetic deformities, creation of second-class citizens and forever changing what it means to be human?</p><p><em>1. Changing a baby's genetic characteristics to reduce the risk of a serious illness that could occur over their lifetime is:</em></p><p>- An appropriate use of medical technology </p><p>- Taking medical technology too far</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="49dbf04bfbffc1e18231f69fc529de15"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6tw_JVz_IEc?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>Another key question concerns growing human organs in other animals. Obviously, we have used animals for testing to develop new treatments already amid changing public attitudes about the cruelty involved, so how ethical is it to use animals simply as incubators of spare body parts?</p><p><em>2. Genetic engineering of animals to grow organs / tissues for humans needing a transplant is:</em></p><p>- An appropriate use of medical technology </p><p>- Taking medical technology too far</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="776f6763c8d018c894df1ccf474eef4c"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Yh6rTKNwBJY?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>This next question pertains to <strong>human enhancement. </strong>How comfortable would you be outfitting yourself with digital chips or other prosthetics and modifications? Famously, Elon Musk is spearheading the development of Neuralink technology that would allow human brains to control machines. In a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-vbh3t7WVI&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">2019 presentation</a>, he described the possibility that such devices would be made to work by first making holes in people's skulls with lasers, followed by feeding flexible electrode threads into the brain. He previously <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smK9dgdTl40&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">promised</a> that such devices would not only give people additional abilities but can also cure brain illnesses like schizophrenia. Recently, <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1224195776131272704" target="_blank">he tweeted</a> an "awesome" update to the tech is coming, sharing also that it might be implanted in humans as early as this year.</p><p>Would you put one of these things on? See how you would answer this:</p><p><em>3. I am ____________________ about the possibility of a brain chip implant for a much improved ability to concentrate and process information.</em></p><p>- Very/somewhat worried</p><p>- Not too / not at all worried</p>
Watch Elon Musk’s presentation on Neuralink here:
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a646a0b439db89b498836659049faf35"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lA77zsJ31nA?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p><span style="background-color: initial;">And now for your thoughts on <strong>automation</strong>. Numerous studies have found that not only is automation coming faster than you think, it's bound to replace <a href="https://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/heres-when-machines-will-take-your-job-predict-ai-gurus" target="_self">the vast majority</a> of human occupations in the next 10-30 years. And it sounds like there's still time left, a <a href="https://go.forrester.com/blogs/predictions-2020-automation/" target="_blank">2020 study</a> by the research company Forrester shows that job loss due to automation is already very much here. They predict that more than <strong>1 million</strong> "</span><span style="background-color: initial;">knowledge-work jobs" will be taken over in 2020 by software robotics, virtual agents, chatbots and decisions based on machine-learning. On the other hand, the firm estimates</span> that <strong>331,500 </strong>net jobs will be added this year to the American workforce alone that are <strong>"human-touch jobs"</strong> utilizing such human qualities as intuition, empathy, and both physical and mental agility. So there's hope humans can adapt and find new things to do once technology takes over.</p><p>Here's your chance to answer for yourself: </p><p><em>4. The automation of jobs through new technology in the workplace has ___________ American workers.</em></p><p>- Mostly helped </p><p>- Mostly hurt</p><p>- Neither helped nor hurt.</p><p>If you're interested what the participants in the Pew Research polls thought, here is the breakdown:</p>
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjc4NDg4My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwMzczNDQxN30.goT61GMeO6JzOxHgdMciGdJYaXq5bo4Q2Yv_2Y9uX7o/img.png?width=980" id="07947" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f38d572619db1c08a0742e39d3870600" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>The Pew Research Center, which carried out the <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/12/key-findings-about-americans-confidence-in-science-and-their-views-on-scientists-role-in-society/" target="_blank">study</a>, pinpointed a specific theme in the findings, citing "the loss of human control, especially if such developments would be at odds with personal, religious and ethical values" as the key source of hesitancy when people think about future technologies. Proposals that give people more control over tech met with more positive response. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
Microsoft Excel doesn’t have to be scary. This $29.99 training breaks it all down.
Get the absolute most out of what Excel can do with this incredible course and become a productivity master. Right now, it's 90% off the regular price.
12 February, 2020
- The Complete Microsoft Excel and VBA Bundle offers full Excel 2019, 2016 and 2013 training.
- The package also shows how to use VBA, Excel's key programming language.
- The $300 package is on sale now for just $29.99.
<p>If you’re looking to save time and be more efficient, Microsoft Excel is a very useful tool to get you there. For organization and data management, there’s probably never been a more impactful day-to-day aid than Excel. But just like anything else, you’ll only get out of Excel what you put in.</p><p>You’ll learn all the steps for getting the absolute most out of what Excel can do with the massive <a href="https://shop.bigthink.com/sales/the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included?utm_source=bigthink.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included&utm_term=scsf-368941&utm_content=a0x1P000004NEcE&scsonar=1" target="_blank">Complete Microsoft Excel and VBA Bundle</a> of coursework. Right now, it’s marked down to <a href="https://shop.bigthink.com/sales/the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included?utm_source=bigthink.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included&utm_term=scsf-368941&utm_content=a0x1P000004NEcE&scsonar=1" rel="noopener" target="_blank">just $29.99, a 90 percent savings off the regular price</a>.</p><p>This collection features nine courses covering every facet of the latest three Excel iterations, Microsoft Excel 2013, 2016 and 2019. Across more than 65 hours of training, your exposure to each will showcase areas where heavy users can find the best shortcuts and efficiency tips for getting the most out of your Excel time.</p><p>Whether you need to know how to create workbooks, enter data, use functions and formulas or even run more complex duties like connecting to datasets outside of Excel or using advanced charts like Surface, Radar, Bubble or more, it’s all right here.</p><p>Meanwhile, you’ll also get two courses in the use of Microsoft VBA. In <strong>Essential VBA Training for Excel: Automate Repetitive Tasks</strong> and <strong>VBA Intermediate Training: Discover Excel Automation Secrets</strong>, you’ll understand how to use VBA, the programming language that drives Excel. Armed with that knowledge, you’ll be ready to create automation and special macros in Excel that can save hours of tedious data entry and other time-consuming Excel tasks.</p><p>A $300 value, this entire collection is available now at <a href="https://shop.bigthink.com/sales/the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included?utm_source=bigthink.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included&utm_term=scsf-368941&utm_content=a0x1P000004NEcE&scsonar=1" rel="noopener" target="_blank">90 percent off, only $29.99</a> while this offer lasts.</p><p><em>Prices are subject to change.</em></p><div data-react-checksum="551638678" data-reactid="1" data-reactroot="" style="position: relative;"><a data-reactid="2" href="https://shop.bigthink.com/sales/the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included?utm_source=bigthink.com&utm_medium=referral-cta&utm_campaign=the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included&utm_term=scsf-368941&utm_content=a0x1P000004NEcE&scsonar=1" rel="noopener" target="_blank"> </a>
<div data-reactid="3" style="border: 1px solid #000000; padding: 35px 10px 35px 35px; text-decoration: none; display: flex; align-items: center;">
<div data-reactid="4" style="flex: 30%;"><img data-reactid="5" src="https://cdnp3.stackassets.com/e7afe76e28db9642abda7c7a48544f8574741e1e/store/ba74f371473bfa216cd1416e35b6f8aa2fa856e374ed9ec2b189e4996caa/sale_22304_primary_image.jpg"></div>
<div data-reactid="6" style="padding-left: 2.5vw; flex: 70%; justify-content: space-between;">
<div data-reactid="7"><strong data-reactid="8">The Complete Microsoft Excel & VBA Bundle - $29.99</strong><br data-reactid="9"><br data-reactid="10"><a data-reactid="11" href="https://shop.bigthink.com/sales/the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included?utm_source=bigthink.com&utm_medium=referral-cta&utm_campaign=the-complete-microsoft-excel-vba-bundle-2013-2019-versions-included&utm_term=scsf-368941&utm_content=a0x1P000004NEcE&scsonar=1" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Learn Excel for $29.99</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div><script type="text/javascript"> (function (s,o,n,a,r,i,z,e){s['StackSonarObject']=r;s[r]=s[r]||function(){
(s[r].q=s[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},s[r].l=1*new Date();i=o.createElement(n),
z=o.getElementsByTagName(n)[0];i.async=1;i.src=a;z.parentNode.insertBefore(i,z)
})(window,document,'script','https://www.stack-sonar.com/ping.js','stackSonar');
stackSonar('stack-connect-p', '393');
</script><p><em><em><em><em>When you buy something through a link in this article or from <a href="https://shop.bigthink.com/" target="_self">our shop</a>, Big Think earns a small commission. Thank you for supporting our team's work.</em></em></em></em></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Why are so few people born on Christmas Day, New Year’s and other holidays?
Christmas Day is the least popular birthday in several countries.
29 December, 2019
Mario Tama/Getty Images
Christmas and New Year's are days of celebration in many parts of the world when people gather with family and friends. One thing many typically don't celebrate on those days is a birthday.
<p>That's because Dec. 25 is the least popular day in the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/business/20leonhardt-table.html" target="_blank">U.S.</a>, <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/3301.0Media%20Release12016" target="_blank">Australia</a> and <a href="http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/pop-birthdays-table.aspx" target="_blank">New Zealand</a> to give birth. In <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/articles/howpopularisyourbirthday/2015-12-18" target="_blank">England, Wales</a> and <a href="https://www.cso.ie/en/interactivezone/visualisationtools/howpopularisyourbirthday/" target="_blank">Ireland</a>, it's the second-least popular, behind Dec. 26, when Brits celebrate <a href="https://www.history.com/news/why-is-the-day-after-christmas-called-boxing-day" target="_blank">Boxing Day</a>. </p><p>So why do people have fewer babies on holidays like Christmas, Boxing Day and New Year's – the second-least popular birthday in the U.S.?</p><p><a href="http://businessmacroeconomics.com/" target="_blank">I am</a> personally interested in the question because my wife was a <a href="https://www.unicefusa.org/press/releases/new-year%E2%80%99s-babies-over-11000-babies-will-be-born-us-new-year%E2%80%99s-day-%E2%80%93-unicef/35321" target="_blank">New Year's Day baby</a>. And as an economist, I find these data puzzles fascinating.</p>
<h2>Least and most popular birthdays</h2><p>
All of the least-favored days in the U.S. are tied to holidays, whether it's Christmas, New Year's, Fourth of July or Thanksgiving.
</p><p>
Depending on the year and place, between 30% and 40% fewer babies are born on Dec. 25 than on the peak day of the year.
</p><p><iframe id="B7oZ4" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/B7oZ4/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><p>
One <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK541384/" target="_blank">reason why these days have so few births</a> is almost no cesarean births are scheduled by doctors to happen on public holidays or weekends. About <a href="https://www.thebump.com/a/c-section-rate-problems" target="_blank">one in three American babies</a> are born this way.
</p><p>
And even in the case of vaginal births, <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/induction-labour/" target="_blank">doctors can induce labor</a>, which helps control when babies are born. Inductions also typically don't happen when doctors want to be out of the office celebrating the holidays with family and friends.
</p><p>
One reason why births on Christmas and New Year's plummet is that for many people <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/3046429/the-highest-paying-jobs-of-the-future-will-eat-your-life" target="_blank">time management and scheduling is paramount</a>.
</p><p>
Interestingly, in England, Wales and New Zealand, relatively few babies are born on April 1. While that date is not a national holiday, mothers might avoid giving birth on <a href="https://daily.jstor.org/the-completely-true-history-of-april-fools-day/" target="_blank">April Fools' Day</a> for fear of their children being taunted or bullied.
</p><p>
As for the <a href="https://www.livescience.com/32728-baby-month-is-almost-here-.html" target="_blank">most popular birthdays</a>, they tend to happen in the fall. In fact, the top 10 days to have a baby in the U.S. are all in September, while in England, Wales, Ireland and New Zealand they're in that month or October.
</p><p><iframe id="z0iZt" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/z0iZt/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><p>
Fall birthdays make sense since <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/christmas-eve-busiest-time-year-get-busy/327997/" target="_blank">many babies are conceived</a> during the colder winter months. <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/babies-conceive-christmas-why-most-parents-couples-conception-a8103201.html" target="_blank">Conception</a> is <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/more-babies-are-conceived-during-winter-fall-180971112/" target="_blank">tied to shorter days and lower outside temperatures</a>.</p>
<h2>Unrecorded births</h2><p>Unfortunately, similar data for non-English-speaking countries are not widely available.</p><p>Research into when people were born is relatively new because for centuries no one needed or completed a birth certificate. In the U.S., <a href="https://www.history.com/news/the-history-of-birth-certificates-is-shorter-than-you-might-think" target="_blank">birth certificates have been widely used</a> only since the end of World War II.</p><p>While some countries require all births to be registered, <a href="https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/birth-registration/" target="_blank">one out of every four children born in the world today</a> does not officially exist, since there is <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/220-million-children-who-dont-exist-a-birth-certificate-is-a-passport-to-a-better-life-so-why-cant-8735046.html" target="_blank">no record of his or her birth</a>.</p><p>The United Nations has some <a href="http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=POP&f=tableCode%3A55" target="_blank">world data</a>, which show <a href="https://visme.co/blog/most-common-birthday" target="_blank">popular birth months tend to shift by latitude</a>. Countries at high latitudes, like Norway or Russia, have peak birth days in July or August. Countries closer to the equator, like El Salvador, have peak birth days later in the year, like October.</p><p>As for my wife, she was born a few hours after her parents welcomed in another year. Her birth was a surprise to all the guests they invited over to celebrate the New Year. We joke that being born then is the best day, because there is always a party with fireworks for her birthday. It is also a great day because there are never any competing birthday parties.</p><p>So if you are born on a holiday like Christmas, New Year's or even April Fools' Day, take some comfort in knowing the relative rarity of your birth makes you even more special than you already are.</p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jay-l-zagorsky-152952" target="_blank">Jay L. Zagorsky</a>, Senior Lecturer, Questrom School of Business, <em><a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/boston-university-898" target="_blank">Boston University</a>.</em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-are-so-few-people-born-on-christmas-day-new-years-and-other-holidays-129109" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
<p><br/></p>
Keep reading
Show less
You should be skeptical when it comes to hyped-up AI. Here’s why.
These questions can help us think more critically about new developments in artificial intelligence.
20 September, 2019
- The media often exaggerate and overhype the latest discoveries in artificial intelligence.
- It's important to add context to new findings by asking questions: Is there a demo available? How narrow was the task the computer performed?
- A more robust approach to artificial intelligence involves solving problems in generalized situations rather than just laboratory demonstrations.
<p class="media-headline">
<strong>Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust</strong></p>
<p><br></p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="TH8UI21568927377" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Rebooting-AI-Building-Artificial-Intelligence/dp/1524748250?SubscriptionId=AKIAJGTABWIBL2VADPUA&tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1524748250" target="_blank">
<img src="https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4122PUsekuL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Rebooting-AI-Building-Artificial-Intelligence/dp/1524748250?SubscriptionId=AKIAJGTABWIBL2VADPUA&tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1524748250" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$28.95</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$18.86</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$18.13</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p><br></p></div>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
