The Challenge and the Opportunity of Artificial Intelligence

There's no doubt that Artificial Intelligence poses a great challenge to Governments across the globe.

Not only directly, as corporations like Google and Facebook use A.I. algorithms to manipulate information as they do at the moment, but in the future as A.I. rolls out and affects the employment market.

The last challenge like this was during the Thatcher years when mining and heavy industry in the UK became uncompetitive and suffered badly. I well remember the nightly lists of companies closing and job losses incurred on the Ten O'clock News.

Those communities heavily reliant on those industries have still not recovered 3 and 4 decades later.

I've blogged before that this new wave, the A.I. wave of redundancies and job losses won't be confined to the working class. It will be a predominantly middle-class problem. The working class jobs have all been automated. The middle class, the thinkers have been more or less unaffected. Not any more. A.I. is a direct threat to the sort of thinking jobs that were historically safe.

Being a middle-class phenomenon, it's a greater threat to middle-class political parties. How they manage the revolution and support the middle class determines if they stay in power or suffer the same fate as the Labour party.

Brexit produces an  exciting opportunity for an enlightened UK government - if it choses to be enlightened.

Free from the shackles of sclerotic EU legislation, a UK government could (much in the way that the Thatcher era government championed IT) start to champion cutting edge technologies like A.I.

A good start would be to start to move education system away from it's current blurred focus on vast quantities of graduates. The QUALITY of the graduates has to change. There has to be a laser-like focus on producing the brightest and the best and bringing them on. Education has to change from merely providing mediocre education for all, to focussing on identifying the brightest and the best from ALL walks of life and providing the streams to suit them that allows them to attain.

This is my biggest frustration with education at the moment. The leftist ideology says that everyone gets the same education. But.... what happens to those bright and talented in a "one-size-fits-all" education system? They fail to attain. They become bored, they are never challenged by a grey, bland just-for-the-sake-of-it education system.

Education I've said before is a strategic resource. It cannot be allowed to be just for the sake of it. It has to provide talent the country can use. An education system that provides a university graduate that eventually ends up sweeping floors is not fit for purpose. All that money, all that time, the resources, the teachers, lecturers, the talent of the graduate, are all wasted. If you are a teacher or a lecturer that is happy to churn out graduates that eventually end up wasting your time, you shouldn't be in the job.

A primary focus has to be on changing early education to identify talent.  Once that's in place, secondary education has to then focus on growing talent, providing multiple streams. Stem, Creative, Historical, Vocational and Caring subjects (to cater for an increasing elderly population) streams should be available.

How these specialist subjects are provided needs some work. But several specialist streams could be provided by a single school.

Further education then works to make experts out of those specialists. Not just in STEM subjects, but in Care, in Vocational subjects like Building, Plumbing. We need people that can manage whole projects as well as wire a plug or plumb in a boiler. But those managers also need to have practical experience of how a plug is wired or a boiler is plumbed and how long it takes.

Anyway, I've digressed. Back to A.I.

Hopefully, with an education system producing the brightest and the best in specialist subjects, we can then tailor that system to produce A.I. experts. Or graduates ready to exploit any emerging technology. I'm sure A.I. will become a feature in the lucrative market of weapons technology.

Britain can then exploit this boom, rather than be exploited. If necessary Government can invest in innovation, although the best would be private investment. Possibly government can kick-start innovation and then hand it over to private business for a price, with a decent and almost immediate return on the investment.

Eventually after we become the world expert on emerging technologies, the UK can go on to export its intellectual property and it's experts across the globe. Just like we did with Scottish shipwrights and Boiler makers, Cornish and Welsh miners back at the start of the industrial revolution.

Or we could do things the Leftist way and tax every A.I. or every company using A.I. to offset the cost of providing benefits to people made redundant by new technology thereby making the UK the most uncompetitive country to use A.I...….. in the world.

Teachers: Licenced to Indoctrinate?

Old Holborn Has a thought on the scheme proposed by the government this week that teachers should have regular reviews and be issued a licence to teach. He thinks that its a mechanism to standardise indoctrination across our schools.

He might have a point, but let me take it further.

So far the government has only been able to ruin state schools. Schools outside the state sector have largely been untouched by the grim hand of government. Thats why children attending public schools fare so much better than those in the state sector.

Enter licences for teachers. Every teacher will be required to have a licence and I assume will be assessed in part on their adherence to the national curriculum. They would probably be marked down for any deviations from the curriculum. This will severely curtain the public schools, who excel in no-expense-spared wide-ranging education that doesn't necessarily adhere to dogmatic PC doctrine and a fixed, narrow curriculum.

Again, its all about control. Its a way to finally control public schools and limit the advantage they give over the state sector.

I should know, I'm a product of one of the crappiest schools in my area. It was so underfunded it was a joke. Metalwork class was hysterical: one lathe between 30 kids. I never actually got to have a go on it, because the term ran out before I had my chance in the queue! We had to buy our own textbooks or share between 2-3 kids because the school couldn't fund a book for every one of us. So I know how important education is. I fought tooth and nail to get my son specialist help. When he was consigned to a mainstream school thanks to Oxfordshire LEA's dogmatic "mainstream or nothing" approach, I fought again to get him statemented and supported in-class. In the end he got GCSE B and C grades, a testament to my initial support (which cost me my career) and the ongoing support of his LSA, who stuck by him all the way through school and only left once he'd finished his GCSE's. Thats the sort of commitment we need in every school in order to improve education. Not dragging the best down to make the lowest look better.

What galls me is that Labour are intent on dragging everyone down to the lowest level; the politics of jealousy, rather than looking at the top percentile and trying to emulate the processes and procedures that go into educating those kids. Nope: in Labours world, if the state can't fund a decent education, then those able to step away and pay for it should be penalised and consigned to banality too.

They are determined to ruin this country.

I just thought I'd add this:

I've since moved from Oxfordshire to Hampshire. I can quite honestly say that my daughter has come on leaps and bounds at her new school, not only educationally, but as a person. To me a convincing case that dogma loses out over a proper, rounded education.