Schlagworte wie Künstliche Intelligenz, Neuronale Netze, Machine Learning, usw. fliegen einem um die Ohren, wenn man heutzutage den Marketingbullshit von Firmen, die Software verkaufen, hört. Wo auch immer Daten verarbeitet werden, wird gern und schnell von künstlicher Intelligenz – ein magischer Begriff – gesprochen. George Orwell hat schon 1946 vor solchen Begriffen gewarnt, weil sie zu dummen, also unüberlegten und das Gesagte nicht hinterfragenden Gedanken („foolish thoughts“) führen und vom eigentlichen Ziel des Sprechers (Verkauf eines Produkts) ablenken würden. Dazu John Palvus auf Quartz:
Using the same science-fictional shorthand [damit ist „Artifical Intelligence“ gemeint] to describe anything from self-driving cars to slightly better ad targeting surely inhibits basic comprehension. But its potential for seeding both magical thinking and abject confusion about real economic, social, and political changes also seems bottomless. If the experts don’t really know what they talk about when they talk about AI, is it any wonder that you and I don’t, either? […] At the very least, we might want to avoid the word “intelligence” when referring to software, because nobody really knows what it means. […] Even Alan Turing, the genius who mathematically defined what a computer is, considered the question of defining intelligence too hard […] So what should we call “AI”, if not that? Orwell suggests that the cure for words that cloud our thinking is better words: simpler ones, crisper ones. Some commentators suggest merely using “software”; personally, I think “automation” does the trick. Instead of priming our minds with visions of inchoate software-spirits possessed of strange powers and inscrutable intentions, being more conscious of the words we choose might allow us to more clearly grasp the technologies around us.
Datenverarbeitung, also. Was für ein langweiliger Begriff! #