← Lex Fridman

Rosalind Picard: Affective Computing, Emotion, Privacy, and Health

第2019-06-17期2019-06-17English会员内容

嘉宾:Rosalind Picard

收听本集00:00 / 1:00:21
阅读设置
按你的习惯阅读
正文字号
下载播客精读
把这一篇,带走慢慢读

英文 · 精读 · 当前版本

下载功能还未开放

正文语言

精读 · 按主题梳理核心观点、论证与案例。

§01Introducing Rosalind Picard

Lex introduces Rosalind Picard, an MIT professor, director of the Affective Computing Research Group at the MIT Media Lab, and cofounder of Affectiva and Empatica. Over two decades ago she launched affective computing with her same-named book on the importance of emotion in artificial and natural intelligence and in human relationships and human-robot interaction. He previews topics from emotion and ethics to privacy, wearables, her epilepsy research, and even love and meaning.

§02The origins of affective computing

Asked how her understanding of affective computing changed over 24 years, Picard explains the original term was broader than recognizing and responding to emotion—the two pieces worked on hardest—also encompassing machines with internal mechanisms that function like human emotion: any computing that relates to, arises from, or deliberately influences human emotion.

§03Clippy and emotional unintelligence

Picard recalls the human-computer interaction people see: scowling and cursing at a computer while Clippy keeps smiling, winking, and dancing, which only deepens frustration. Clippy had sophisticated AI for its day but was emotionally unintelligent—like a puppy that, instead of flattening its ears when yelled at, smiled and danced. Bill Gates got a standing ovation announcing its demise because people were so annoyed.

Clippy was intelligent about what help a letter needed but oblivious to not smiling while you annoy your customer—a mismatch developers didn't consider. Intelligence then meant math, language, chess, and well-defined games, whereas social-emotional interaction is far more complex and required skills many computer scientists personally lacked.

§04Computer science and empathy

Lex notes a lingering lack of empathy among computer scientists. Picard counters that computer scientists are a far more diverse group than 25 years ago—which is good, since computer science should reflect society's needs, and brilliance exists in every personality type, not just those who prefer computers to people.

好对话,值得读完整。

免费试读到此结束。开通书架会员,继续阅读全文,解锁中英对照与电子书下载。