double_arrow
Article Archive

double_arrow Ask an Expert Attorney

reCAPTCHA


double_arrow
What Our Clients Say ...

5.0
Based on 104 reviews
powered by Google
Dieter Schänzer profile picture
Dieter Schänzer
1 month ago
Absolutely superb outfit - highly competent in their field. I trust them implicitly and would deal with them again over any other IP firm. On a human level - very nice people too.
M profile picture
M
2 months ago
Albright IP offers highly competitive and transparent pricing, communicates promptly and professionally, and handles cases with impressive efficiency. I would highly recommend their services.
Andy Matthews profile picture
Andy Matthews
4 months ago
What can I say about Albright IP? They state 'Excellence in Intellectual Property' and that is exactly the service I received. I was really worried about the patent application for my new product and the team at Albright swept in and saved the day in a swift and professional manner, making me feel completely at ease and in safe hands from the outset. I cannot recommend Alright IP enough they are simply a fantastic company!
See All Reviews


double_arrow
Need a Product Designer?


double_arrow
Helpful Tips

Do I have to identify the designer?
It is possible to waive the name of the designer when filing a European Community Design, but you should be sure that you have the rights to the design

AI and Google’s Kill Switch

by | Jun 21, 2016

AI-PatentArtificial intelligence (AI), Virtual Reality (VR), autonomous vehicles, and battery development are the near future (not investment advice, but there’s definitely money here!). All four fields are seeing a rapid and exciting increase in research and funding, and the technology in these fields will almost certainly improve exponentially from the fledgling systems we are currently seeing to sophisticated devices in the next few years or decades.

AI and Google

Google’s Deepmind (which recently won four out of five games of ‘Go’ against a human counterpart, thus hailing a watershed moment from the science world) in conjunction with Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute has recently published a document (Safely Interruptible Agents) investigating disabling or turning off AI if a human operator doesn’t like the AI’s actions. A kill switch or ‘big red button’, in effect. But would that really be necessary? Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking think so. However, a number of others, including Eric Schmidt, the executive chairman of Google, feel that super intelligent computers or robots, where the AI reaches human levels of cognition allowing exponential improvements without human interaction are never actually likely to be released, certainly in any near future involving our children or grand-kids. Eric Schmidt points out rather bluntly that Musk and Hawking are not computer scientists, and as such do not have the facts and knowledge to make such statements with any certainty.

Google and Patents

Though, that hasn’t stopped Google filing some interesting sounding patents to such things as ‘neural network training’, ‘parallel convolutional networks’, ‘reinforcement learning with a neural network’ and ‘classifying data objects’. The patents help protect Google’s financial investment in this rapidly-developing field of research, and it would be assumed much of this technology may ultimately find its way into such things as autonomous cars and other vehicles, which are currently a hot topic. But from the general overviews above, you can easily appreciate the focus on the development of at least semi-self-aware data networks which allow the forming of at least rudimentary AI.

Reflections

Is it a good thing that Google is tying up or trying to tie up areas of this technology? A patent is used to control the use or implementation of your technology or development. If an organisation with less than honest intentions (and I’m not suggesting this is Google’s case – I’m a fan and hugely impressed with what Google has achieved in a relatively short space of time) was to develop an AI technology and patent it to better control or utilise it with less restriction or interference, would that cause a problem?

The assumption is that Google, whilst being a hugely successful commercial entity and requiring a revenue stream, is aiming to improve the World for everyone, and as such by protecting its financial interests through the use of patenting seems wholly right and sensible. But who actually has a ‘kill switch’ for Google, just in case?

p.s. If you do have a tech- or software based patent, you can submit this to Google for review and possible purchase. 28% of submissions have been made a purchase offer, at an average of around £20,000.

Author

  • Adrian Hocking, Patents Director

    Adrian is a Director, as well as a qualified Engineer and an experienced British and European Patent Attorney. Adrian relishes the challenge of obtaining potent and robust patent protection in the UK, Europe and worldwide. Having dealt with over 900+ European patent applications, not to mention all his British and US patent experience, Adrian enjoys advising his diverse international client-base in all aspects of intellectual property law.

    Adrian's Qualifications: Engineer | Patents Director | Chartered British Patent Attorney | European Patent Attorney | European Patent Litigator | IP Litigator (UK Patents)

    Adrian's Attorney Profile Page: Adrian's Profile
    LinkedIn: Adrian Hocking

    Ask Adrian a Patents question:

    reCAPTCHA

    View all posts