I've recently spent a few late night hours reading articles in the progress of AI. It is an amazing field fraught with some deeply concerning ethics issues. Of course those familiar with Sky-net will cite it as the ultimate demise of mankind taken over by its superior creation of the Machines etc. I suppose that has some merit. And then there are the Blade Runner Replicants who can barely be distinguished from their human counterparts…frankly I think these already exist at many DMVs.
But in dipping my toe into AI I was forced to look for its purpose or purposes. One purpose is found in the desire to live forever and some functioning companies now exist to make “living” bots out of dead brain material. The idea is to replicate a deceased individual so conversations can be had to comfort survivors. This already includes visual representations that are gleaned from real life footage and run through algorithms etc. to make facial expressions that appropriately match the speech. Pretty clever and I have no doubt this could be a viable service that goes beyond placing ashes on the mantle.
The ethical concern(s) for me is that AI can fool one as to whether or not the interaction being experienced is human or bot. The popular ChatGPT. A good basic article on this AI invention is https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-chatgpt/. A lesser concern is that many of mankind's creative, intuitive and inspirational facets will be lost and replaced by a mechanism. I've seen some of the art produced by Ai and it is even better than Hunter's
Knowing you are conversing with a bot can be fine and even entertaining in the sense that it is a new toy of sorts. It is clearly not alive so don't go down that road just yet. It is self aware only to the degree it has learned about self awareness…it is NOT born but brought into existence by mankind. And no we are not God but we are creators in a lesser degree.
AI, especially of the variety that continues to learn and presumably adapt and incorporate that learning will be a part of life going forward. It will take over some jobs, replace or displace many humans but also bring a new era of service to the medical field, space travel, and yes even DMVs. It will eventually be extremely difficult to know if you are speaking with a human or a bot, much like the phone calls I have to the IRS. I can see this as somewhat harmless but also see it could be used nefariously. Would a bot become a criminal. I can't say no especially a learning bot taught by a criminal. These really smart scientists working on AI must find ways to protect humans from AIs that become super criminals or would be Sky-nets. Is it possible for AI to actually be self aware? I say no to the degree that something to be self aware must be present beyond that of which is becomes aware. That is not meant to be a word salad. It was once put in another way when describing the soul or spirit as the being who uses the mind and brain. The idea incorporates existence outside of the physical world. An entity that was called the Awareness of Awareness unit. I think that has merit. An example given of this function is to ask one to close their eyes and envision a cat. Then ask to describe the cat in detail. Then ask who is looking at the cat…this is then supposed to evoke the answer…ME or I am. Me in this case would be the Awareness of Awareness unit or spirit/soul as distinct from what one is aware of. Is is that being/thing that experiences awareness and does the looking so it is NOT itself awareness but a infinite capability to be aware of what it looks at etc.. I know, more word salad.
In a practical sense, we are truly in the first inning as to AI being in our lives. Someday it will be in some robotic machination, take over all of those dangerous tasks like strolling into a radiation disasters, or washing windows 2 miles up on a short skyscraper or venturing into deep space without concern for food, water or air. It will indeed be a part of humankind's advancement. It should not become its successor, replacement or demise and therein lays the ethical requirements issue. There must be a kill switch so to speak or some limitation planned into it and like the Kanamits of 60s Twilight Zone Days To Serve Man but not for dinner. Powerful engines have at times had to use a governor…something that limits the output. This will have its corollary in AI. Some might say that defats the exercise. Oh, what exercise is that?
Given a purpose, AI can continue the management of a company after death of its founder, be a storehouse of data and “intelligence” as a super Butler, a loving sex partner for those unable to navigate the real world challenges of it, a companion for the old and infirm, a teacher for youth….yes, I can see a lot of discrete purposes for AI. These applications may not be enough to satisfy some who want it to replace mankind, its frailties and messy emotions. If their end game is no men or women or children and a world filled with convincing replicants, count me out. But if it can be used as a source of continuity over time to express policies and maybe even wisdom, I am in. The barrier of time could in a sense be conquered by AI. It could become not just the Librarian but the entire Library meant to Serve Man. I am hoping that the ethical issues get addressed . But knowing the evil that can lurk in the hearts of men, I think we must include the most stringent requirements over its use and those who control its creation and programs. Once it self replicates we have a problem here. Could Sky-net be far away?
Let's make sure this does not become Man's Final Frontier but rather a new era of cooperation and benefit from and with smart machines. And oh yes, always remember, they ARE machines for now. I say for now because I can see that a bridge could be crossed in some future lab that allows man made pro-creation to be part of the AI set up. Then it will be almost impossible to determine God's work from Man's work. Maybe that is someone's purpose. The hubris.
Best,
Donn Marier or Is It?
DM-Your Own CFO