artificial intelligence
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a contentious issue, the focus of a broad conversation that affects everyone, and is often viewed with suspicion.
Environmentally, AI poses serious implications to an already critical situation, not only because of its huge energy requirements – one destined to increase exponentially in the coming years – but also driven by the need to support vast, resource-intensive infrastructures. This growth in energy consumption is especially concerning at a time when we, as a global community, ought to be doing everything possible to reduce our energy use.
That said, AI does represents an extraordinary development, one that is a testament to our ingenuity and sophisticated technological expertise. Yet, indirectly it also exposes our limitations; after millennia of marvelling at our ongoing list of awe-inspiring achievements and (devastating) dominance over nature, it seems that long-held position of supremacy is being challenged by one of our own creations, and that is why some people are troubled by both its accelerating development, and our increasing dependency upon it.
The assumption that we, as a species, are special, has prevailed since the dawn of civilisation, yet we conveniently use ourselves as the measure to justify that bold claim: we are special because we cultivate crops and breed livestock. We each have a soul (allegedly), and a broad palette of emotional expressions. We can control nature and manipulate inorganic matter. As conscious beings, we are endowed with free-will (allegedly), and can convey our thoughts to others through language, both written and spoken. We can use and create sophisticated tools. We can reason and plan ahead. However, all those attributes that collectively define us as ‘special’ are simply what we either consider unique about ourselves, or that in which we excel.
It is not an objective conclusion, in that we could easily employ the same selective evaluation with another organism. For example, the axolotl – a type of salamander – has the ‘special’ ability to regenerate lost body parts, including the limbs, spinal cord, and even parts of their heart and brain. All adaption evolved to increase the prospect of survival, and that incredible regeneration adaption of the axolotl suggest that they are far superior than humans in terms of survival. After all, if we consider the sum of our combined achievements in light of the immeasurable damage they have inflicted on the planet’s vital ecosystem – resulting in the extinction of thousands of species, and putting ourselves on the endangered list – it amounts to the antithesis of survival. So what distinguishes us from all other life, is not our brilliance, but rather our dysfunction in not using our unique adaptions to ensure our future. And what really betrays our hubris, is that we’re doing this, knowingly and wilfully.
The advancement of our tools, both in complexity and efficacy, has been profound and swift. In our modern history, we have completely embraced that mechanical revolution – the fabric of our societies, and even the values it supports, reflecting the productivity and dominance of our machines. Transport, construction, agriculture, communications, food production, distribution, health care, finance, entertainment… in fact, almost every aspect of human life relies on technology. And, consistent in that endeavour to automate our lives, that technology has now delivered Artificial Intelligence, another tool that can perform a multitude of tasks far more efficiently than we can do ourselves.
So why is there so much concern surrounding this recent addition to our tool box? It is not because AI can play chess better than a grand master, paint a Picasso in moments, write a new composition by Beethoven, or do the administrative or creative work of thousands of people in just a matter of seconds, but that it is going to be used to perpetuate what we already do, but at a rate and scale that is only going to hasten our current trajectory – that of self-destruction.
Artificial Intelligence can only ever be an extension of ourselves – made in the image of its creator – and so it will be used to win wars, and to further exploit people and the planet, all to generate profit for those who own and control the technology that supports and promotes AI.
Some concerns which AI already presents are in reference to copyright infringement*, increased unemployment, the threat to our misplaced sense of superiority and perceived autonomy, the erosion of our privacy, the existential implications it poses to our ‘natural’ social interactions, voice/identity cloning, and the fear that it can supersede our own creativity, amongst others – but all those are superficial distractions in view of the bigger picture. AI is a weapon, one that is going to be used against life. That is not an alarmist comment, but a very measured acknowledgment that the prevailing mentality of those who rule, is the pursuit of wealth over welfare. AI is a new and exciting addition to their already devastating armoury, which they will use to further that destructive end.
There is no way to reconcile our remarkable technological achievements with the pernicious intentions that fuel their creation.
Despite the ongoing mantra of all politicians being the promise of economic growth, the very concept is unsustainable. An economic incline unavoidably results in an ecological decline. Money, or rather the processes involved in creating money, which are used by the privileged minority to generate themselves even more money, is the real threat to our survival – not the tools they use to achieve that: A knife can be used to divide a cake so that it can be shared, or it can be used as a weapon to injure or kill. Sadly, the choice has been made – they get the cake, whilst threatening life with the knife.
When a few individuals wield more power than those who pose as our leaders, society – or that what we understand as society – is fated. The notion of leadership in its own right has failed us, forcing servitude and allegiance, and creating divisions and inequity. But having an elite group who hold the leaders in the same grip as those leaders do us, is extreme in its implications.
We need to recognise, in terms of human evolution, hierarchy is an unnatural construct on which to build a society. Hierarchy, is defined by inequality, and the idea cannot exist without conflict, which is why all pyramidic civilisations will inevitably collapse.
* Whenever a singer, artist, or writer is interviewed, one question inevitably arises: who were their early influences? Creativity stems from drawing inspiration and influence from others; without these foundations, it is difficult to create anything of substance. We blend these influences and call the result original, yet it is undeniably shaped by what we’ve absorbed through the creativity of others. And is that any different when AI learns by processing vast amounts of material and uses that to generate its own compositions? Of course it is different – different in that AI doesn’t suffer from the childish vulnerability of an ego, nor, indeed, vanity.
As children, we perform for our community to build confidence and gain acceptance, receiving praise and encouragement in return. As adults, our role shifts; we contribute to, and serve, the community out of responsibility, not to seek notoriety or adulation by turning the focus of that contribution onto ourselves. The desire for personal gain or validation, rather than caring for the community, reflects our ongoing immaturity.
Check out meritocracy, which explains why it is irrational to think we should take the credit for what we believe are our own achievements.
Nov 2024