Going Against Conventional Wisdom

To the Editor:

Re “People Say Queer People Are Born That Way. It’s More Complicated,” by Charles M. Blow (“Don’t Tell My Friends, But …” series, Aug. 4):

As one of those who “fit a certain cultural stereotype,” a gay man who has experienced same-gender attraction long before puberty, I must object to Mr. Blow’s dismissal of biology as a major contributor to sexual orientation.

Studies of identical twins have shown a 50 percent or more concordance of both twins being same-gender-attracted if one is — strikingly high compared with the incidence in the general population, and evidence of the strong role of genetics in this particular human condition.

When he concludes that the identification and expression of our attractions (though not the attractions themselves) are merely choices, I’m afraid that Mr. Blow does not, as he claims, make the discussion “more sophisticated,” but simplifies it for those who think that L.G.B.T.Q.+ people are just making bad choices that are unhealthy for themselves and society, and that can be outlawed, like smoking in public.

I remained silent and in dread for decades for fear of losing my job, my family, even my freedom if arrested. I was born with a certain genetic code, and born into an environment and society with its own codes that are also a part of me.

I will still insist I was “Born This Way,” not as a political slogan, but as the most accurate explanation of who I am.

Bradford Colegate
Columbus, Ohio
The writer is a retired family physician.

To the Editor:

Re “The Saying Goes: Dogs Are Man’s Best Friend. But Cats Are Better,” by Pamela Paul:

Dear Ms. Paul:

Just answer one question for me: Would you rather your human significant other acted more like a cat or more like a dog?

If you answer more like a cat, I would not believe you.

It is the rare person who wants a partner (human or otherwise) whose greatest virtues are independence and aloofness.

We love dogs more than cats because they are more like our human selves. Indeed, recent research has shown that dogs can “smell” human stress and respond accordingly.

Moreover, cats may come toilet-trained, but it is humans who still must clean those “toilets.” And need I remind you that cats clean themselves with their own saliva? I hate to think about where that tongue has been.

Bruce Sheiman
New York

To the Editor:

Pamela Paul’s persuasive argument steps gingerly around another supportive point about owning a cat: the terrible behavior of many dog owners. In every city and country I have lived in, streets and parks are littered with dog poop — sometimes bags of it, left behind by canine owners who apparently expect someone else to clean up their, shall we politely say, “mess.”

The sniveling, slobbering, crotch-sniffing and dependent conduct of dogs is bad enough. The indifferent, entitled and morally repugnant way their owners act is far worse.

Joel Savishinsky
Seattle

To the Editor:

As one who walks the dog while wearing a T-shirt that says “Real men love cats,” I believe that it comes down to this: Dogs are interactive. Cats are user-friendly.

Martin F. Kohn
Huntington Woods, Mich.

To the Editor:

Re “Many People Fear A.I. They Shouldn’t,” by David Brooks:

Mr. Brooks is right to be proud of humanity. As he points out, the human capacity to “love and bond with others” and to “seek and create meaning” is uniquely valuable.

Unfortunately, just because humanity is valuable doesn’t mean that we will automatically remain in charge. If we design and build A.I. that can outwit us and outcompete us in the marketplace, then A.I. will do so. It is precisely because A.I. does not know or care about love and friendship that we should maintain a healthy level of caution and concern when enhancing its powers.

Alligators are heartless and have little interest in arts or music; that doesn’t stop them from biting your arm off if you stick it in a swamp. Instead of assuring the public that A.I. will be good for humanity, Mr. Brooks should help us think through what kinds of policies will allow us to use A.I. safely.

Jason Green-Lowe
Washington
The writer is executive director of the Center for A.I. Policy.

To the Editor:

David Brooks makes two fundamental errors. First, in an effort to dispel the notion that A.I.-driven machines will replace humans, he sanguinely predicts that A.I. will end up being “a useful tool.” At least since the 1960s, Marshall McLuhan, Neil Postman and others have shown that new communication technologies are never neutral tools, but cultural change agents that engender revolutionary change in human affairs. We now have decades of evidence regarding the impacts of print, television and computing to support this view.

Second, Mr. Brooks bases his optimism on the resilience and morality of the human mind, as if this were a contest between I.B.M.’s Big Blue and a Marvel superhuman hero.

The important point is that once A.I. is embedded in our searches and calculations, there will be no capacity for human review. Whatever errors or “hallucinations” are made, we will have to live with them. Far more than the specter of A.I.-driven robots seizing military power, the usurpation of human agency is the existential threat posed by artificial intelligence.

Gary Kenton
Greensboro, N.C.

To the Editor:

Re “Don’t Hate on the D.M.V. It’s Actually Great,” by Tressie McMillan Cottom:

Years ago when I started driving (1969), a trip to the D.M.V. wasn’t something to look forward to. You would get down there early, before 8:30 a.m., in the vain hope of getting in and out quickly. Of course everyone else did the same thing so the line was a block long. Then the doors would open, and you had to stand on a line for at least half an hour just to find out what forms you needed and which line to stand on. The ordeal could last two hours.

Things are much better now. Everything is computerized. You make an appointment online. You go to the office, sign in, and get called and processed. I was just in the Yonkers D.M.V. and was finished in 10 minutes.

So unlike my local building department, where getting a permit can take a year, the D.M.V. is the model that all government should be like.

Alan Blum
Mount Vernon, N.Y.