A Scientists' View of the Election

By William St. John, Democrat and Scientist

While I do not believe that Trump gives a damn about the concerns of the economic underclass; his acknowledging their existence and concerns, won him the election. And if Bernie Sanders had been the Democratic nominee, he would be President.

One of my many pursuits is Artificial Intelligence (A.I.).

.I. like “the Cloud” means different things to different people.  Each person’s definition tends to be shaped by how they intend to use A.I. to further their objectives. A.I. today is relatively primitive. I am reminded of this fact each time “SIRI” fails to understand my request to “call wife.”
One use of A.I. is designing digital communications that elicit an action on the part of a reader. Examples range from simple digital advertising campaigns to more complex interactive chat bots that interact with people helping them to sign up for a service, complete a form or use customer assistance. 
A.I. driven by machine learning is my field of interest. The computer studies the historical activities of each person in a group then develops several hypotheses as to the best way to communicate which it tests with select subsets of the group.  Based on test results, the computer impediments communication programs that hopefully are more relevant to readers and thereby elicit the desired response from the reader. 
As a scientist, I like the objectively of A.I.  But as a caring person, I love the non-binary approach to human interactions that is made possible with A.I. These systems do not look at people as either good or bad, but as humans with multiple dimensions that influence their behavior.  
Binary means there are only two choices. Examples of binary thought abounded in this election. If you listened to political commentators, advisors and Clinton zealous’  there were only two types of voters: “dumb racist mean-spirited Trump supporters” versus “the smart Clinton inclusive supporters”.

Read rest of article: