Machine learning is a computational process. To that end, it is inextricably tied to computational power - the tangible material of chips and semiconductors that the algorithms of machine intelligence operate on. Most obviously, computational power and computing architectures shape the speed of training and inference in machine learning, and therefore influence the rate of progress in the technology. But, these relationships are more nuanced than that: hardware shapes the methods used by researchers and engineers in the design and development of machine learning models. Characteristics such as the power consumption of chips also define where and how machine learning can be used in the real world. Despite this, many analyses of the social impact of the current wave of progress in AI have not substantively brought the dimension of hardware into their accounts. While a common trope in both the popular press and scholarly literature is to highlight the massive increase in computational power that has enabled the recent breakthroughs in machine learning, the analysis frequently goes no further than this observation around magnitude. This paper aims to dig more deeply into the relationship between computational power and the development of machine learning. Specifically, it examines how changes in computing architectures, machine learning methodologies, and supply chains might influence the future of AI. In doing so, it seeks to trace a set of specific relationships between this underlying hardware layer and the broader social impacts and risks around AI.
A number of organizations ranging from terrorist groups such as ISIS to politicians and nation states reportedly conduct explicit campaigns to influence opinion on social media, posing a risk to democratic processes. There is thus a growing need to identify and eliminate "influence bots" - realistic, automated identities that illicitly shape discussion on sites like Twitter and Facebook - before they get too influential. Spurred by such events, DARPA held a 4-week competition in February/March 2015 in which multiple teams supported by the DARPA Social Media in Strategic Communications program competed to identify a set of previously identified "influence bots" serving as ground truth on a specific topic within Twitter. Past work regarding influence bots often has difficulty supporting claims about accuracy, since there is limited ground truth (though some exceptions do exist [3,7]). However, with the exception of [3], no past work has looked specifically at identifying influence bots on a specific topic. This paper describes the DARPA Challenge and describes the methods used by the three top-ranked teams.