Around the time J. Robert Oppenheimer learned that Hiroshima had been struck (alongside everyone else in the world) he began to have profound regrets about his role in the creation of that bomb. At one point when meeting President Truman Oppenheimer wept and expressed that regret. Truman called him a crybaby and said he never wanted to see him again. And Christopher Nolan is hoping that when Silicon Valley audiences of his film Oppenheimer <\/em>(out June 21) see his interpretation of all those events they\u2019ll see something of themselves there too.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n After a screening of Oppenheimer<\/em> at the Whitby Hotel yesterday Christopher Nolan joined a panel of scientists and Kai Bird, one of the authors of the book Oppenheimer is based on to talk about the film, American Prometheus<\/em>. The audience was filled mostly with scientists, who chuckled at jokes about the egos of physicists in the film, but there were a few reporters, including myself, there too. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n We listened to all too brief debates on the success of nuclear deterrence and Dr. Thom Mason, the current director of Los Alamos, talked about how many current lab employees had cameos in the film because so much of it was shot nearby. But towards the end of the conversation the moderator, Chuck Todd of Meet the Press<\/em>, asked Nolan what he hoped Silicon Valley might learn from the film. \u201cI think what I would want them to take away is the concept of accountability,\u201d he told Todd. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cApplied to AI? That\u2019s a terrifying possibility. Terrifying.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n He then clarified, \u201cWhen you innovate through technology, you have to make sure there is accountability.\u201d He was referring to a wide variety of technological innovations that have been embraced by Silicon Valley, while those same companies have refused to acknowledge the harm they\u2019ve repeatedly engendered. \u201cThe rise of companies over the last 15 years bandying about words like \u2018algorithm,\u2019 not knowing what they mean in any kind of meaningful, mathematical sense. They just don\u2019t want to take responsibility for what that algorithm does.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n He continued, \u201cAnd applied to AI? That\u2019s a terrifying possibility. Terrifying. Not least because as AI systems go into the defense infrastructure,<\/strong> ultimately they\u2019ll be charged with nuclear weapons and if we allow people to say that that\u2019s a separate entity from the person\u2019s whose wielding, programming, putting AI into use, then we\u2019re doomed. It has to be about accountability. We have to hold people accountable for what they do with the tools that they have.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n While Nolan didn\u2019t refer to any specific company it isn\u2019t hard to know what he\u2019s talking about. Companies like Google, Meta and even Netflix<\/a> are heavily dependent on algorithms to acquire and maintain audiences and often there are unforeseen and frequently heinous outcomes to that reliance. Probably the most notable and truly awful being Meta\u2019s contribution to genocide in Myanmar<\/a>. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cAt least is serves as a cautionary tale.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n While an apology tour is virtually guaranteed now days after a company\u2019s algorithm does something terrible the algorithms remain. Threads even just launched with an exclusively<\/em> algorithmic feed<\/a>. Occasionally companies might give you a tool, as Facebook did<\/a>, to turn it off, but these black box algorithms remain, with very little discussion of all the potential bad outcomes and plenty of discussion of the good ones.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cWhen I talk to the leading researchers in the field of AI they literally refer to this right now as their Oppenheimer moment,\u201d Nolan said. \u201cThey\u2019re looking to his story to say what are the responsibilities for scientists developing new technologies that may have unintended consequences.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cDo you think Silicon Valley is thinking that right now?\u201d Todd asked him. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cThey say that they do,\u201d Nolan replied. \u201cAnd that\u2019s,\u201d he chuckled, \u201cthat\u2019s helpful. That at least it\u2019s in the conversation. And I hope that thought process will continue. I\u2019m not saying Oppenheimer\u2019s story offers any easy answers to these questions. But at least it serves a cautionary tale.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n