How much our brains are computationally structured is still an area of active debate (…
Appu Shaji

This will be my last response because it is more than clear that you simply do not understand my arguments and objections to what I simply call “technological despotism”.

You are missing my whole point. It’s obvious why. If I could make you see, what I see, your whole past career and studies and passion would fall in ruins.

Therefore, a simple and straightforward statement about your product and similar ones: computers makes people dumber, not smarter. Your claims, promises, and marketing talk do not correspond to the truth, which is far simpler than you want us to believe. You are helping computers to take over our lives, our work, our decisions, our minds and our capabilities to judge over art and images and aesthetics. That is not a positive evolution. Not at all. And I will fiercely continue to fight anything that threatens humanity and everything that should remain human and not be transferred to a machine.

Basically, and like I’ve said before, you are feeding data into a computer and make it reappear again as some kind of other data. That’s all a computer *can* do. It crunches numbers, in a very simple or a very complicated way. But it cannot learn, not think, and certain not *feel*! When I decide over the qualities of art or images, I think, I extrapolate, I go back to past experiences, and — most importantly of all- I *feel*!

Your product and all the learning machines in the world are unable to feel nor to learn, no matter what clever tricks you will use to make us doubt about clear definitions of learning. Even if it would be acceptable (but it is not) to call this number crunching a “learning process”, it would be totally different from what a human learning process is.

This wouldn’t be such a problem in the real world, IF it wasn’t for the fact that the consumers of your product will simply stop using their brain capacities and totally rely on your product for decisions they should take themselves. People are LAZY. They will abuse the product to “make their lives easier” — not to make their decision-making about images better or faster or more effecient. That is the big big big and dangerous trap I see here, and which most people, you included, refuse to see. The product will not enhance anything, it will REPLACE something: the human, imperfect, aberrant, yet totally creative side of things! Just look at the horrible impact of smartphones (smart phones for dumb people…) on human lives and normal, human communication. People have become enslaved to machines. I will fight that evolution as long as I am human.

A few questions to end this all (I fail to read an answer to my previous questions in previous responses…): Will you allow your product to make mistakes and learn from those mistakes? And if yes, how are you going to implement that? Who is deciding about who is giving all the input to your programme? How frequently will you update this feed? And finally: Are you aware of the vastness of the impact on the human mind and life that your product and similar ones will have, and are you willing to take up that responsibility?

Products like yours simply remind me of the story of “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice”: If you would fail to understand the metaphor, I will gladly help you out.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.