YouSaid · the spoken record

Rosalind Picard

lines on the record: 69
first: 2019-06-17
most recent: 2019-06-17
sittings or episodes: 1
sources: podcast

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“Those of us. I've admitted students who say that they, you know, when you list, like, who do you most wish you could have lunch with or dinner with, right? And they'll write, like, I don't like people. I just like computers. And one of them said to me once when I had this party at my house.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Are awfully big companies, right? They have incredible power. And, you know, what if China were to buy them, right? And suddenly all of that data were not part of free America, but all of that data were part of somebody who just wants to take over the world and you submit to them. And guess what happens if you so much as smirk the wrong way when they say something that you don't like? Well, they have re-education camps, right? That's a nice word for them. By the way, they have a surplus of organs for people who have surgery these days. They don't have an organ donation problem because they take your blood and they know you're a match. And the doctors are on record of taking organs from people who are perfectly healthy and not prisoners. They're just simply not the favored ones of the government.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“I think we should be a little bit more worried about who's looking at us and listening to us. The device sitting on your countertop in your kitchen, whether it's Alexa or Google Home or Apple Siri, these devices want to listen to While they say ostensibly to help us, and I think there are great people in these companies who do want to help people, let me not brand them all bad. I'm a user of products from all of these companies I'm naming all the A companies alphabet, Apple, Amazon.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“To put in place protection around reading people's emotions without their consent and in certain cases like characterizing them for a job and other opportunities. So I also think that when we're reading emotion that's predictive around mental health, that that should, even though it's not meta, All of that non medical data, when we put it together with machine learning, now called AI, even though the founders of AI wouldn't have called it that, that capability can not only tell that you're calm right now or that you're getting a little stressed, but it can also predict how you're likely to be tomorrow if you're likely to be sick or healthy, happy or sad, stressed or calm.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Yeah, yeah, yeah, great questions. I prefer the, you know, they talk about the carrot versus the stick. I definitely prefer the carrot to the stick. And, you know, in our free world, there's only so much stick, right? You're going to find a way around it. I generally think less regulation is better. That said, even though my position is classically carrot, no stick, no regulation, I think we do need some regulations in this space. I do think we need regulations around protecting people with their data that you own your data, not Amazon, not Google. I would like to see people own their own data. I would also like to see the regulations that we have right now around lie detection being extended to emotion recognition in general, that right now you can't use a lie detector on an employee when you're on a candidate when you're interviewing them for a job. I think similarly we need”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Elon Musk more money or to make Amazon Jeff Bezos more money. Good, gosh, you know, that's the wrong ethic. Why are we building it? What is the point of building AI? It used to be it was driven by researchers in academia to get papers published and to make a career for themselves and to do something cool, right? Like because maybe it could be done. Now we realize That is enabling rich people to get vastly richer. The poor, the divide is even larger. And is that the kind of future that we want? Maybe we want to think about maybe we want to rethink AI. Maybe we want to rethink the problems in society that are causing the greatest inequity and rethink how to build AI that's not about a general intelligence, but that's about extending the intelligence and capability of the have-nots so that we close these gaps in society.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Yeah, that's the general thinking of it. We know how to go into the video and see, for example, your heart rate and respiration and whether or not they've been tampered with. And we also can put like fake heart rate and respiration in your video now too. We decided we needed to do that after we developed a way to extract it. We decided we also needed a way to jam it. And so the fact that we took time to do that other step too, right? That was time that I wasn't spending making the machine more effectively intelligent. And there's a choice in how we spend our time, which is now being swayed a little bit less by this goal and a little bit more like by concern about what's happening in society and what kind of future do we want to build. And as we step back and say, okay, we don't just build AI to build AI to make Elon.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“What if our technology can read it even non context? What if our technology can read it without your prior consent? And here in the US, my first company we started affectiva, we have worked super hard to turn away money and opportunities that try to read people's affect without their prior informed consent. And even the software that is licensable, you have to sign things saying you will only use it in certain ways, which essentially is get people's buy-in, right? Don't do this without people agreeing to it. There are other countries where they're not interested in people's buy-in. They're just going to use it. They're going to inflict it on you. And if you don't like it, you better not scowl in the direction of any censors.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Usually, I mean, there are some restrictions when the athlete does this as part of the national broadcast. Maybe the teams get a little unhappy about picking that forum to do it, right? But that's more a question of judgment. We have these freedoms. In places that don't have those freedoms, what if our technology can read your underlying affective state?”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Kinds of more subtle privacy. So here in the US, if I'm watching a video of, say, a political leader, and in the U.S. we're quite free, as we all know, to even criticize the president of the United States, right? Here, that's not a shocking thing. It happens about every five seconds. But in China. What happens if you criticize the leader of the government, right? And so people are very careful not to do that. However, what happens if you're simply watching a video and you make a facial expression that shows a little bit of skepticism? Here we're completely free to do that. In fact, we're free to fly off the handle and say anything we want.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Well solved in a short amount of time. I actually think there's a more important issue right now than the difficulty of it. And that's causing some of us to put the brakes on a little bit. Usually we're all just like step on the gas. Let's go faster. This is causing us to pull back and put the brakes on. And that's the way that some of this technology is being used in places like China right now. And that worries me so deeply that it's causing me to pull back myself on a lot of the things that we could be doing and try to get the community to think a little bit more about, okay, if we're going to go forward with that, how can we do it in a way that puts in place safeguards that protects people?”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“pick up implicitly. We don't see that changing yet. There aren't breakthroughs yet that lead us to believe that that's going to go any faster, which means that it's still going to be kind of stuck with a lot of limitations where it's probably only going to do the right thing and very limited narrow pre-specified context where we can prescribe prescribe pretty much what's going to happen there. It's hard to predict the date because when people don't work on it, it's infinite. When everybody works on it, you get a nice piece of it.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“I think it is as difficult as I thought it was going to be. I think my prediction of its difficulties spot on. I think the time estimates are always hard because they're always a function of society's love and hate of a particular topic. If society gets excited and you get hundreds of thousands of researchers working on it for a certain application, that application gets solved really quickly. The general intelligence, the computer's complete lack of ability to have awareness of what it's doing, the fact that it's not conscious, the fact that there's no signs of it becoming conscious, the fact that it doesn't read between the lines, those kinds of things that we have to teach it explicitly what other people”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Let's just say there's a lot more variety among computer scientists these days. Computer scientists are much more diverse group today than they were 25 years ago. And that's good. We need all kinds of people to become computer scientists so that computer science reflects more what society needs. And there's brilliance among every personality type. So it need not be limited to people who prefer computers to other people.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Intelligence at the time was really all about math and language and chess and games, problems that could be pretty well defined social-emotional interaction is much more complex than chess or go or any of the games that people are trying to solve. And in order to understand that required skills that most people in computer science actually were lacking personally.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Keeps ripping up the college country. And in fact, they could have done it smarter like a puppy if they had done if when you yelled at it or cursed it, if it had put its little ears back and its tail down and shirked off, probably people would have wanted it back, right? But instead, when you yelled at it, what did it do? It smiled. It winked. It danced, right? If somebody comes to my office and I yell at them, they start smiling, winking, and dancing. I'm like, I never want to see you again. So Bill Gates got a standing ovation when he said it was going away because people were so ticked. It was so emotionally unintelligent, right? It was intelligent about whether you were writing a letter, what kind of help you needed for that context. It was completely unintelligent about, hey, if you're annoying your customer, don't smile in their face when you do it. So that kind of mismatch was something the developers just didn't think about.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“I don't expect the newest students to these days, but I've mentioned it to a lot of audiences, like how many of you know this clippy thing and still the majority people seem to know it.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Dancing, winking, that kind of thing just makes you even more frustrated. And I thought that stupid thing needs to see my affect. And if it's going to be intelligent, which Microsoft researchers had worked really hard on, it actually had some of the most sophisticated AI in it at the time, that thing's going to actually be smart. It needs to respond to me and you. And we can send it very different signals.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source
“Yeah, actually originally when I defined the term affective computing, it was a bit broader than just recognizing and responding intelligently to human emotion, although those are probably the two pieces that we've worked on the hardest. The original concept also encompassed machines that would have mechanisms that functioned like human emotion does inside them. It would be any computing that relates to arises from or deliberately influences human emotion. So, the human computer interaction part is the part that people tend to see. Like if I'm really ticked off at my computer and I'm scowling at it and I'm cursing at it and it just keeps acting, smiling and happy like that little paper clip used to do.”
2019-06-17 · Lex Fridman Podcast · Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT · source