You say yes, it’s artificial because it is presented in nonhuman expressions. You say no it’s not artificial because you read somewhere that it isn’t, though you don’t remember where you read it.
Is AI intelligent? You say yes because it can look up sources for quotes faster than you or anyone you know or have known. You say no because if it were really intelligent it would be able to win chess matches against Grand Masters or would be able to cheat and win them in ways no Grand Master could detect.
Once you begin to worry and doubt things said about AI in news reports you, upon reflection, conclude that because AI itself doesn’t express worries and doubts it is like a big cartoon movie by Wes Anderson. Entertaining. Funny/ironic. Real enough to be thought-provoking. But fleeting.
In the real world AI isn’t on your worry list. Which may include whether you are assured eternal life if you believe in god. Or why gas costs are roughly the same everywhere in your home state. Or what happens if cryptocurrency makes all financial instruments inoperative: cash, credit cards, checks; and you can’t buy food?
And then, as AI becomes front page news, when it emerges that one of its designers, Sam Altman, has suddenly been fired but may be quickly rehired, it becomes impossible to comprehend. All those doing the hiring and firing are mega-millionaires or billionaires (their true wealth is hidden behind secretive property and banking structures).
The good grey purveyor of intriguing factoids on such matters tells us that AI’s backers are split about Altman. The New York Times says some erstwhile Altmanites are followers of “Effective Altruism.” Others believe the best chance at an “altruistic” outcome is to make as much money as possible. (Sam Bankman-Fried, who advocated for such, was found guilty of lying about what he was doing, and now faces many years in federal prison as a result.)
AI doesn’t care what happens to Altman, Bankman-Fried, and all their Thrones, Dominions, Princedoms (and Princessdoms) and Powers.
AI doesn’t “know” things; it just amasses factoids of human knowledge. It is designed by mathematicians and constructed by engineers to refine thoughts and build outcomes.
AI doesn’t care if one of its creators (an Altman associate), says she wants to slow its growth because some day “it could lead to human extinction.”
AI can’t follow who among humans is concerned about extinction. Occasional alarms about global warming and its offsprings - death of species, newly or variantly present human diseases, crop failures, massive fires and droughts, are of no concern to AI. Nor is the massive depression created by all of these.
“Get thee to a psychologist” seems to be the remedy amongst the AI crew. “What, me worry?” seems the electoral response, busy dispensing mega-billions without a visible thought to how AI is further enabled by the funding.
Is there an alternative response? Once again I recommend the newly released movie, now on Netflix, “Rustin.” In 1963, as now, a movement necessary for human survival grew and flourished. Opposition was vicious, deadly, and widespread. Individual trauma involving such essential matters as sexuality were divisive.
My advice? Don’t throw away communication devices like cellphones, any more then we activists did with telephones back then. Don’t avoid social media, any more than we activists destroyed typewriters and mimeograph machines back then.
Know the law, as we activists did back then. Enable and support the righteous and courageous among us. They’ve always been there. AI won’t care, it can’t. Humanity can. I hope it will!
(Larry Bensky welcomes comments: LBensky@ igc.org.)
Be First to Comment