OMNI
AI, AUTOMATION, Robotics ANTHOLOGY #1
September 29, 2026
Compiled by Dick Bennett
Contents
2026
Garrison Lovely. Obsolete: The AI Industry’s Trillion-Dollar Race to
Replace Us – and How to Stop It.
Caitlin
Johnstone. “The
Real Danger Of AI Is That It Is Run by Evil Warmongers. “
2024
Robert Weissman. “AUTOMATION, ROBOTICS,
AI ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE massive possibility
for fraud.”
Review of Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence,
by Matteo Pasquinelli.
2023
“Moving Too Fast on New Technology” by Coralie Koonce.
Matteo Pasquinelli,
The Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence.
David Price, Review of Vonnegut’s books. “Kurt Vonnegut [1950s] Warned Us About the
Dangers of Automation.”
2020
New Laws of Robotics with Frank Pasquale
1952
Kurt Vonnegut (1952 to 1982), Player Piano, God Bless You Mr. Rosewater,
Breakfast of Champions, Deadeye Dick.
TEXTS
“RACING TOWARDS EXTINCTION?”
Garrison Lovely. Obsolete.
OR Books , co-published with The
Nation, 2026.
“Incisive, urgent, and necessary, Obsolete sounds the alarm about the oligarchs’ dystopian plots and reminds us why we must recommit to our shared humanity.” –– Krystal Ball
OBSOLETE
The AI Industry’s Trillion-Dollar Race to Replace Us – and How to Stop It
by GARRISON LOVELY.
“A disquieting debut...provides enough evidence to make even
enthusiastic AI boosters want to burn their electronics…an unsettling
perspective on the perils of allowing AI to develop without oversight.” —Publishers Weekly
"If you are worried about AI, this timely and engaging book tells you that
you should be—because Silicon Valley has made choices that should indeed worry
us all." ––Daron Acemoğlu
"One of the smartest thinkers there is on how, exactly, to conceptualize
the technology's risks for humanity"
–– Vox
"Provides an illuminating snapshot of the current state of the debate on
AI while proposing some sensible ideas on how to handle a technology that
threatens to cause a lot of harm and entrench even greater inequality across
the globe if left unchecked." ––
Jacobin
“Thoughtful, well-reasoned…and absolutely terrifying. I’m glad I read it.
Obsolete is a crucial blueprint.”
—AJ Jacobs
"An invaluable primer on AI's ins and outs, and an urgent warning about
the threat its corporate boosterists' plans pose to democracy and civilization
itself." —Luke Savage
“Garrison Lovely is exactly what the Left needs at this moment in technological
history.” —RobertWright
“Garrison Lovely is one of our best researchers and thinkers. His work is an
antidote to fuzzy thinking, essential for understanding what the real risks of
AI are and how they can be dealt with effectively.”
—Nathan Robinson
“The
Real Danger Of AI Is That It Is Run By Evil Warmongers. “ Caitlin Johnstone from Caitlin’s Newsletter caitlinjohnstone@substack.com Mon, Sep 21, 2026.
Caitlin Johnstone, Sep 22.
The biggest AI threat isn’t artificial
superintelligence wiping out humanity in a fit of mechanical vengeance like
some digital Old Testament God, it’s the same oligarchs and empire managers as
usual inflicting the same evils and abuses as usual upon their fellow man.
We’re already presently watching the empire building AI into its
killing machines
and causing all kinds of horrifying problems while these technologies become
more and more complex and unpredictable.
CNN reports that US military AI “almost started a war”
with China when it hallucinated intelligence showing a Chinese ship
transporting nuclear weapon components to Iran; US military planes were
apparently already in the air preparing to attack the vessel before human
intelligence picked up on the error.
Katie Bo Lillis @KatieBoLillis
NEW: An AI-assisted intel report sent the military
scrambling to intercept a Chinese ship in the Middle East it believed was
transporting components of a nuclear weapons program. It turned out to be a
hallucination. And it "almost started a war."
cnn.com
Exclusive: US military had close
call after using AI for false intelligence report, sources say | CNN Politics
A recent Pentagon report has officially
concluded that an over-reliance
on Palantir’s AI-powered command-and-control system Maven contributed to the
bombing of a school in Minab which killed 120 children attending classes on the
first day of the US-Israeli war with Iran.
We learned early on in the Gaza holocaust that the IDF was using
AI to help it bomb suspected Hamas members when they are at home with their
families rather than when they are out in the battlefield using a program
called “Where’s Daddy?” — a bit of Israeli humor about the fact that they would
be killing the children of Palestinian resistance fighters when their fathers
came home.
We’re seeing politicians like Bernie Sanders voice concerns that “AI could soon be smarter
than humans and function outside of our control,” but the most obvious and
imminent threat right now is not that artificial intelligence will outsmart us
and escape our control, it’s that it is being fully controlled by humans who
are stupid and evil.
Scientists and industry leaders have been increasingly
clear: AI could soon be smarter than humans and function outside of our
control. For the sake of all of humanity, Trump and Xi must negotiate a treaty
NOW to pause AI and ban superintelligence before it is too late.
Again, we know for a fact that powerful
nuclear-armed military forces are knitting AI into all their systems. We’re
watching them do it, right in front of our faces. An increasingly complex and
confusing element has been added to an environment of already tense and
dangerous military standoffs around the world as the US and its allies work to
absorb the few remaining nations who have managed to retain sovereignty into
the imperial power umbrella. And yet recent weeks have seen the mass media
flooded with punditry speculating
about possible scenarios under which AI might perhaps wind up leading to human
extinction.
We already know the most likely scenario under
which AI will get us all killed. If it happens, it will be because rich and
powerful sociopaths knit these technologies into war machinery that is designed
for killing humans at mass scale. Duh.
These developments are unfolding in the
context of a frenetic new arms race with China in which nobody’s willing to tap
the brake pedal for fear of falling behind. Any talk of regulation or
slowing things down before they get out of control is dismissed because the
competition-based systems which currently govern human behavior have thrust us
into a nightmare of constant military expansionism and brinkmanship instead of
collaboration and harmony, all fueled by the fact that this paradigm makes tech
plutocrats and war profiteers obscenely wealthy.
That’s clearly the most immediate existential
threat that AI poses to our species right now. There’s also the only slightly
less frightening threat of artificial intelligence enabling our rulers to use
mass surveillance and autonomous weapons systems to stifle any revolutionary
political movement before it gets off the ground, locking us into this freakish
capitalist dystopia until the planet is an uninhabitable wasteland.
In any case, this isn’t a new threat. It’s
the same old threat with new toys. Capitalism must end, and the empire must
fall. Our very existence depends on it.
Caitlin’s Newsletter
is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work,
consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip
jar if you feel inspired. All my work is free to bootleg and use in
any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise;
whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley. No AI used
in any works.
Feature image via Adobe Stock.
Invite your friends
and earn rewards If you enjoy Caitlin’s Newsletter, share it with your
friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.
Invite
Friends
2024
Robert Weissman. “AUTOMATION,
ROBOTICS, AI ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE massive possibility for fraud.”
Public Citizen via uark.onmicrosoft.com 5-7-24
“Policymakers must
rush to put in place protections or we’re facing electoral chaos.”
That’s what I told The New York Times in a story on deceptive
content generated by artificial intelligence (AI) technology — audio, imagery,
and video known as “deepfakes” — being used to mislead voters and foment
confusion around elections.
And here’s what I said on NBC Nightly News:
“They are compelling and convincing. They sound real. They look real. So
there’s massive possibility for fraud.”
AI-generated deepfakes threaten democracy as we know it:
· With Big Tech recklessly pumping out ever more
powerful AI, we are rapidly getting to the point where everyday Americans, and
even experts, won’t be able to distinguish what’s real from what’s fake.
· Without clear rules in place in time,
AI-generated deepfakes could very well determine the outcome of the 2024
presidential election.
· Equally as threatening to a functioning
society, an onslaught of deepfakes could make voters feel so confused and
powerless that millions essentially give up on our democracy altogether.
With Public Citizen
leading the way, 15 states have already passed legislation — with bipartisan
support — to minimize the chances of deepfakes undermining statewide elections.
And we formally petitioned the Federal Election Commission (FEC) — the
government agency that is *supposed* to safeguard the fairness and integrity of
our elections — to issue clear rules banning the use of deepfakes by national
candidates and political parties.
But the FEC is dragging its feet, so rules may not be in place in time to
prevent AI-generated deepfakes from wreaking havoc throughout the upcoming
presidential election.
To
the Federal Election Commission:
Why
is the Federal Election Commission STILL dragging its feet on the threat that
political deepfakes pose to the very core of our democracy? The FEC must act
without further delay — before it is too late for the 2024 election — and issue
clear rules banning the use of AI-generated deepfakes by federal candidates and
parties.
Click
to add your name now.
Thanks for taking action.
For democracy,
Robert Weissman, President of Public
Citizen
Public Citizen | 1600
20th Street NW | Washington DC 20009 | Unsubscribe
2023
“The Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial
Intelligence” – book review
Editor. mronline.org (1-21-24).
Pasquinelli’s Eye of the Master [2023]
provides a materialist analysis of AI and technology, which Kevin Crane finds
to be an excellent antidote to all the nonsense and hype spouted about AI.
Originally published: Counterfire on January 18, 2024 by
Kevin Crane (more by Counterfire) |
(Posted Jan 20, 2024)
Culture, Internet, Literature, MediaGlobalNewswire, Reviewartificial
intelligence (AI), Eye of the
Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence, Matteo Pasquinelli
Any of you who tried
to follow the twists and turns of Artificial Intelligence (AI) hype in 2023
will probably agree that it has been an exhausting exercise. The year began
with the high-profile public introductions of large language models like
ChatGPT and other generative systems, which got millions of people excited
about what seemed like a magical breakthrough in technology, only for the story
to pass through a series of massive controversies, including strikes, legal
challenges, and major scientific and philosophical debates.
We also had
absurdities, such as the ludicrous palace drama around ChatGPT figurehead Sam
Altman being fired and unfired as CEO. And, of course, we had depressing
displays of staggering ignorance, such as discredited failing alt-right tech
entrepreneur Elon Musk talking complete nonsense while being interviewed by
discredited failing alt-right prime minister Rishi Sunak. The fact that stories
about AI are so often dominated by ridiculous wealthy men who often have no
real qualification to discuss the subject isn’t just annoying, it also makes it
factually harder for people who want to get to grips with the real implications
of these technologies to do so.
All of which leads to
the excellent timing of this book.
Matteo Pasquinelli, The
Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence
(Verso 2023), 272pp.
by Matteo Pasquinelli
is a solid antidote to both the boosterish hype and fanciful doom-mongering
that tends to colour mainstream coverage of AI. . . .
[The entire review is well worth your time.
–D https://mronline.org/2024/01/20/the-eye-of-the-master-a-social-history-of-artificial-intelligence-book-review/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-eye-of-the-master-a-social-history-of-artificial-intelligence-book-review&mc_cid=cf9190498d&mc_eid=ab2f7bf95e
]
At his conclusion in
the present day, Pasquinelli ends the book by calling on the reader to
understand what AI technologies are through a specifically labour theory of
automation, and that AI is not some end point or apocalypse, but the result
of a set of technological advancements that have abstracted automation to the
point where it can now automate itself. This has happened because we have both
the technical ability to make such machines, but also there is an economic
incentive to do so, and to reorganise the divisions of labour once again.
AI is not pursuing
some alien or eldritch agenda separate from the capitalist system that has
produced it, and it has physical limitations of capacity and energy
consumption, like every previous technology. He implores that the solutions to
problems in the AI era are not to be found in determinism, but that ‘The first
step in technopolitics is not technological but political’ (p.253), and
advises people to take an interest in groups and individuals who are engaged in
what he calls ‘action research’. This is the work, and activism, of uncovering
and beginning to challenge the excessive power of the small set of bloated
monopolistic tech corporations that have risen to the top of society in the
present era. It sounds to me like a thoroughly good way to learn more about how
the labour movement should be organizing in the time of AI.
Sections
CORALIE KOONCE: “Monster on loose?”
[CK, as usual, prescient. –D]
“Moving too fast on new technology” by Coralie Koonce
Special to the Democrat-Gazette | July 24, 2023.
Some decades ago, I read that the salvation of
capitalism lay in genetic engineering and digital technology. We have seen this
prediction play out with many innovations and huge new markets.
By 2020, bio-tech accounted for about 2
million jobs (1 percent of all jobs) and a $2.9 trillion impact on the economy
(14 percent of gross domestic product). That includes biomedical research,
bioengineered seeds, GMO foods, and more.
Similarly, the digital economy was 10.2
percent, or $2.1 trillion, of U.S. GDP, with growth led by an expansion of
e-commerce. Together, bio-tech and digital technology add up to almost
one-fourth of economic activity.
Ordinary people gained. I love my word
processor! But technologies also have unintended consequences. Introducing new
genetic material into nature resulted in new resistant pathogens. Artificial
intelligence contains its programmers' prejudices. A large nuclear electricity
plant like Zaporizhzhia in Ukraine can be turned into a ticking bomb.
There's no referendum asking the public
whether we want a new technology to dominate our lives. No agency to show
everybody how to use it. Yet everybody is expected to have a smartphone, even a
homeless person living under a bridge. Our only role is as individual
consumers.
Meanwhile, science fiction serves as our early
warning system. Mary Shelley wrote the first science fiction story in 1818, in
which Victor Frankenstein, "the new Prometheus," creates a living man
from body parts. This does not turn out well.
E.M. Forster's prescient short story about the
future, "The Machine Stops" (1909), shows a society completely
dependent on an automated network. When it suddenly stops, people have no idea
how to keep themselves alive.
Czech playwright Karel Capek introduced the
term robot in a 1920 play. "Rossum's Universal Robots"--produced in a
factory--end up causing the extinction of the human race. However, Isaac
Asimov's 1950 novel "I, Robot" gave us the three laws of robotics,
designed to keep robots our devoted servants.
By now there are dozens of science-fiction
novels about artificial intelligence (AI), not to mention many popular movies
from "A Space Odyssey" to "The Matrix."
Lately, however, warnings have been coming
thick and fast from quite a different direction--the very people who developed
artificial intelligence in the first place. Surprisingly, industry leaders want
more regulation of their own industry. Hundreds of executives, researchers, and
engineers recently signed a statement saying: "Mitigating the risk of
extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale
risks, such as pandemics and nuclear war."
Risk of extinction they say. Yet they had to
know this day was coming.
Another open letter, signed by over 1,000
people in this field, called for a six-month pause in development. They spoke
of "an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful
digital minds."
The sudden concern was prompted by a new
generation of Chatbots such as ChatGPT, Bing, and Bard, which can conduct
open-ended conversations, write poetry, or generate code. Immediate fears are
that advanced AI will be used to spread misinformation and propaganda. It could
also eliminate millions of white-collar jobs, according to a May story by Kevin
Roose in The New York Times.
AI's rapid improvement means that Artificial
General Intelligence (AGI) may soon match or exceed human performance in
several areas. Chatbots have "emergent properties" and are teaching
themselves to do new things.
The Technological Singularity, a hypothetical
future time when superintelligence replaces mere human intelligence, was first
described by mathematician Vernor Vinge in 1993. Ray Kurzweil, a prominent
proponent, believes it will usher in a wonderful era ("The Singularity Is
Near: When Humans Transcend Biology," 2005).
Such techno-utopians believe advanced
technology will end the problem of economic scarcity and bring out the best in
people. However, they don't have much to say about human psychology, the
natural environment, or those living in the poorer 85 percent of the world.
[OVERSIGHT NEEDED]
Obviously, many in this field are frightened by the speed of new developments,
although quite divided about exactly what is happening and what should happen
next. Perhaps an international AI safety organization, similar to the
International Atomic Energy Agency?
In 2021, UNESCO made recommendations for
ethical guardrails, pointing out that AI business models are concentrated in
just a few countries, a handful of firms, and male-dominated teams. Meanwhile,
half the world doesn't have an Internet connection.
On a recent episode of "60 Minutes"
(July 9), an industry person said societies must quickly adapt. But why must we
always be the ones to adapt to the technology? Technologies are not fated.
Billions of dollars are poured into them, and thousands of bright people
employed to develop them.
We need a great deal more information about AI
issues and choices, including philosophical questions and ethical dilemmas.
For at least 80 years, humans have been
developing and deploying risky new technologies because they had economic
potential. It is time that ordinary people had a say in these decisions.
Coralie Koonce is a writer living in
Fayetteville, and the author of "Little Handbook of Arguments."
“Kurt Vonnegut Warned Us About the Dangers
of Automation.”
One of the author’s recurrent themes dealt with
the deep costs of outsourcing work to the machines. BY DAVID H. PRICE. JUNE 21, 2023.
Last fall, I taught a
seminar for first-year college students on automation’s projected impacts on
society. We read think tank reports predicting that a third of now existing jobs will be replaced by
robots in the next decade and a half. We also looked at a variety of
techno-utopian and dystopian predictions, and works of fiction by authors like
Steven Millhauser and Kurt Vonnegut. And we couldn’t have known it at the time,
but looking back, it was the last period of techno-calm before the unleashing
of ChatGPT and other Artificial Intelligence engines.
We also read David Graeber’s essay “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs” which has this great opening where he
reflects on childhood memories from the 1960s when he was promised a labor
saving high-tech Jetsonian future, with jet packs, flying cars, and robots doing most
of our labor for us; leaving us with increased leisure time. While flying cars
never materialized, many other labor-saving devices have arrived. But instead
of liberating us, as promised, our work days instead expanded, and job security
has become precarious. It is true that many of these old jobs are now done by
machines, but the promise that automation would result in less work for us was
a lie; what happened instead was that unnecessary managerial work proliferated,
generating meaningless endless assessment tasks and the creation of
bureaucracies that self-replicate while most workers endure longer hours for diminishing
pay.
But it was Vonnegut’s 1952 novel, Player Piano, that fueled our most interesting discussions. Player
Piano, the author’s first novel, portrays a dystopia following a Third
World War where automation makes most work unnecessary. It explores what
happens to people in a world where technology eliminates the need for human
labor and thought.
Charles Scribner's Sons
publishers
Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut, First edition, hardcover,
1952.
Player Piano depicts a future where most human labor
is no longer needed as automated processes manufacture all goods and
standardized tests select the few elite engineers who will run the massive,
automated manufacturing plants, while the vast majority of society is kept
alive with some sort of basic universal subsistence payment and made docile
with television, alcohol, parades, and other diversions. This is a world where
automation has liberated humankind from the need to toil but has failed to
provide meaningful tasks for these supposedly liberated people.
Vonnegut describes
these developments as forms of techno-colonialization,
in which “ People are finding that, because of the way the machines are
changing the world, more and more of their old values don’t apply any more.
People have no choice but to become second-rate machines themselves, or
wards of the machines.” This technology creates permanent structural
unemployment, and Vonnegut shows us how that can result in a more harshly
bifurcated form of social stratification.
The technology running
the machines in Player Piano isn’t of the variety dominating
today’s high-tech factories. The novel’s machines instead record the actual
movements of the skilled workers’ hands; they later emulate the human movements
they have recorded—using a similar process as the one used to create the
self-playing pianos that became popular in the early 1900s.
Vonnegut observed this
sort of technological evolutionary path-not-taken while working at General Electric (GE) in the 1940s in
their public relations department. As postwar automation rapidly progressed,
industrialists experimented with a form of industrial automation known as
the Record Playback System.
General Electric
pioneered this system, which recorded, with great precision, the movements of
skilled machinists producing parts. This system had advantages for small
projects needing rapid production, but fell short in its reliance on a skilled
worker to generate the master work that would be copied and reproduced by
machines.
While at GE, Vonnegut
was privately shown a prototype record playback system that mass produced mill
rotor blades for gas turbines. He was told to not make information on these
machines public, because, as Vonnegut later wrote, “ the workers’ union would
put the ugliest possible interpretation on the development. [They’d] frighten
their members with the prospect of being canned. Nobody cared to explain that
to me. My duty was to write and release only stories which would make everyone
think well of the company.”
Some GE managers and
engineers privately expressed misgivings to Vonnegut, including worries
about machines completely replacing the craftsmanship of skilled workers And
yet no one publicly protested these developments, as the then-predominant view
was that “all technological advances were by definition good.” Vonnegut later
recalled how the unease of these GE engineers and managers inspired him to
write Player Piano.
In our world today, AI
now appears ready to replace everyone from fast food workers to the computer
coders who replaced the skilled craftspeople who once manufactured goods. In
some ways, the record and playback technology dominating Player Piano’s
world has eerie parallels to the plagiaristic mechanisms running today’s AI technologies: These programs mimic the
words, arguments, brushstrokes, and creativity of human labor as they adapt
these products for their own uses.
Vonnegut understood the ease with which American capitalism blames
those who are surplus labor for their plight once they are no longer needed.
Player Piano wasn’t the only novel where Vonnegut
critiqued technology as a force beyond human control, In Deadeye Dick (1982), firearms are killing
machines that humans had failed to control; Breakfast of Champions (1973) envisions robotized humans
operating beyond the possibility of freewill. In the latter, he viewed American history as having “used human beings for
machinery, and, even after slavery was eliminated, because it was so
embarrassing, they and their descendants continued to think of ordinary human
beings as machines.”
But it was God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater (1965)
that provides his most relevant critique of automation in a capitalist society.
Here, Vonnegut
understood that labor-saving technologies don’t necessarily make human lives
easier, and as labor-saving devices reduce the need for human labor, these
technologies reveal fundamental questions about what people are good for.
Towards the conclusion
of God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, Vonnegut’s alter ego, Kilgore
Trout, philosophizes about a world where the newly unemployed are despised
after new technologies make their labor obsolete. Instead of liberation,
automation brings scorn for displaced workers. The situation, according to
Kilgore Trout, presents “a problem whose queasy horrors will eventually be made
world-wide by this sophistication of machines. The problem is this: How to love
people who have no use?”
I believe that the greatest immediate risk presented to humanity
by AI is not some robotic control of military weapons, but instead its
application within the logic of capitalism.
Vonnegut understood
the ease with which American capitalism blames those who are surplus
labor for their plight once they are no longer needed. This understanding is
broadly missing in our modern world, and if AI rapidly displaces workers across
a vast spectrum of jobs, we will be ignoring these truths at our peril.
In fact, we are
already seeing how rapidly vicious attacks on AI-displaced workers can occur.
During the recent debt default negotiations between President Joe Biden and
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the bipartisan willingness to link basic economic benefits to employment is just one
expression of Trout’s recognition that “Americans have long been taught to hate all people
who will not or cannot work.” And the ease with which our society angrily blames the unhoused for their fate makes it easy to imagine the
sort of dark outcomes that rapid AI displacement could bring.
As such, I believe
that the greatest immediate risk presented to humanity by AI is not some
robotic control of military weapons, but instead its application within the
logic of capitalism—an alignment that will further relegate human needs as
secondary to market forces.
Proposed demonstration of simple robot self-replication [drawing omitted].
We simply do not know
what comes next, and while things like universal basic income are occasionally dangled as possible solutions, capitalism cannot meet the crisis
that will emerge in the next stages of automation, whatever they may be.
Vonnegut teaches us
that technology can’t solve our problems and that caring about other people is
our best hope. Questions of what we do with the new worlds created by AI will
be political struggles that will need to address inherent human worth and the
value and dignity of work. We will need to understand that these new machines
will be incapable of caring about human suffering. Or, as
Vonnegut put it, they won’t be able to find “reasons and methods for treasuring
human beings because they are human beings.” These are uniquely
human tasks, Vonnegut reminds us, they are why we are here.
Tags
DISPATCHES ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE AUTOMATION WORKER CAPITALISM CORPORATIONS TECHNOLOGY
David Price is a professor of
Anthropology at Saint Martin’s University. For the last three decades he has
used the Freedom of Information Act to document the FBI and CIA’s engagements
with anthropologists, activists, and public intellectuals.
READ
MORE BY DAVID H. PRICE JUNE
21, 2023
|
2020 |
|
New Laws of Robotics with Frank Pasquale Frank Pasquale joins Money on the Left to
discuss the legal and monetary politics that will determine the future of
automation. Professor of Law at the Brooklyn Law School, Pasquale is author
of The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money
and Information (2015) as well as recently published New Laws of
Robotics: […] | more… mronline.org 12-3-20 |
END AI, AUTOMATION, ROBOTICS ANTHOLOGY #1
No comments:
Post a Comment