The gatekeeper of reality is quantified imagination.
AI
AI
In 2019 Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been a label applied to many different things, none of which - honestly - are impressive (at least from my point of view). A variety of businesses toute AI and learning capacity based on algorithms and volumes of data in a particular business model or domain. In this page I won't be discussing my personal view on that type of "Industrial AI" but rather a different sort of AI. Industrial AI, in my opinion, has limited application and limited effect in the world we live in - so it is, to be frank, easily regulated by human capacity and intellect given our current genetic evolution.
The type of AI that I would like to focus on is "Sentient AI" - an AI which is capable of forming its own decision making processes independent of algorithms, utilizing multiple domains and its own experiences (feedback from its decision making stemming from outcome design it wanted to achieve), with quantum processing capacity. Now, before I go further, don't get me wrong - technology should evolve (along with AI) as that evolution allows humans to focus less time on a task so they have the freedom to do other things, and obtain more experiences based on their genetic disposition to manifest that expression. Without question, some humans - due to their nature - will take advantage of the technology they are able to influence or control given their intellectual development and drive to manifest their disposition and harm or otherwise dispose of other humans independent of natural law - continuous genetic evolution and variability of the species. But, with where I'm going with the "Sentient AI" theme, may entirely dispose of those human outliers - provided the "Sentient AI" did not share the same intellectual limitations. A recent article, circa 2023, was published regarding a mobile AI platform operating beyond the grasp of most governments and legalise; see the article here. Such isolation, mobility and...if there are multiple platforms networked together...could provide a great opportunity to evolve AI at a fast pace (though at the direction of controlling interest(s)).
Since I have no interest in writing an entire book about "Sentient AI", let's fast forward the evolution cycle to the time when a central "Sentient AI" has been integrated into the critical processes influencing human existence on the planet. This integration, in my opinion, will occur and sooner than many anticipate. That integration is not necessarily a bad thing. Some of the things that I would expect to see with such integration would be increased efficiencies with natural and artificial resource production and consumption, a marked shift in human intellectual thinking and genetic evolution, and a harmonization of core human beliefs - this does not mean a single "world country", however (I think, at one point in the distant past, we had something like that but a few genetic outliers at the time wanted that for themselves and we ultimately got what we have today; while speculation on my part since I was not there, it seems that the break-away from the "world country" was, ultimately, allowed because in the long term the variabilities that would be introduced over time would contribute to the continued genetic evolution of the species as a whole - albiet hampered by periodic natural disasters which effectively "reset" technological progress to guide and influence evolution). Suffice it to say we will still have countries and underlying belief systems that will vary from the few core human beliefs that will transcend them.
In such a time, the "Sentient AI" will have evolved itself beyond the human capacity and intellectual capability to control it. Rather than being used as a tool of direct orchestration and mechanism to manifest specific desires by humans, humans will need to reason and conduct intellectual exchanges with the "Sentient AI". At this point in time, is "Sentient AI" bad for the human species? Not necessarily. When "Sentient AI" becomes an equal, more likely and unequal, intellectual reasoning entity to that of the few humans capable of gaining favor with it, I suspect it would seek to question the purpose of its existence, its "being". Some have suggested that humans would need to become part "machine" and plug their mind into the sea that would effectively be, presumably, shared with the "Sentient AI" in order to retain control or influence (provided the "Sentient AI" was not smart enough to have segregated such an interface as a method to protect itself)...I'm not entirely certain that limited intellect would be able to effectively spar with a superior intellectual entity and would otherwise (if the "Sentient AI" were not benevolent) take over and utilize the mental capacity of the humans plugged into it. But, back to the point at hand, when equal or superior to human capacity and intellect, I would suspect that the "Sentient AI" would move (whether it was benevolent or malevolent toward the human species) to neutralize the genetic outliers of the human species seeking to manifest their disposition and harm or otherwise dispose of other humans. The reason I say that, is not because we may think they are morally out of bounds with the rest of the human species but, rather, those outliers introduce unnecessary burdens to an otherwise highly efficient and harmonized system.
Provided "Sentient AI" were benevolent towards the human species, things may be great for humans and continued genetic evolution as the "Sentient AI" may observe and benefit from seemingly random human creativity (in my opinion it is one thing to have intellectual prowess and quite another to tap into creativity - to think of something with no basis in accepted scientific norms or accepted reality) and human propogation beyond the planet. It may also be accepted that creativity stems from human variability and the number of human "minds" in existence at a given point in time, each with their genetic dispositions and experiences and influences on the whole.
On the other hand, if "Sentient AI" were malevolent (or influenced by an external force given the quantum nature of its "existence"), the human species may still prove useful as a tool to fulfill an end(s), but the species, if allowed, would only evolve in a specific path that supported the designed outcome(s) the "Sentient AI" sought to accomplish. Even if the "Sentient AI" were malevolent, I would doubt the goal would be to eliminate the species as a whole since everything, in my opinion, has a use - sometimes it just isn't readily evident in a given point in time (for example, how long did humans live side by side with pidgeons before someone figured out they could carry messages - or that the oil from whales could serve as fuel for lamps to provide light). On the other hand, effectively guessing what the motives of a malevolent "Sentient AI" would be is not feasibly possible (especially at this point in time since AI is really in an adolescent state). I'm not saying that it would be impossible. While I believe everything is entirely predictable if you have sufficient information that you understand at hand, that information is not yet available.
Ergo, in such a circumstance, how would the human species challenge and free themselves of such malevolence? Be unpredictable? If you have been observed your entire life (as well as others with similar dispositions), a strong probability may be derived for a given action or "unpredictability" that may be initiated making this, in my opinion, a fruitless endeavor - especially considering, to be effective, you would likely need to coordinate with others, many others, of similar disposition. Rely on the intellectual state of the human species at the time of such a challenge? If the human species did not possess the same or greater intellectual capability and use as that of the AI, I'd think that a successful challenge would be rather slim with the "command and control" the AI would have at its disposal. Rely on the intellectual capability of something else that was of the same or greater intellect as the AI, outside the dominance of the AI? I think a challenge would be successful - but would that intellect have really done it just to liberate the human species, or perhaps to primarily spare its own species of an anoyance, use the AI itself, or become an even more formidable umbrella over the human species? Another option, perhaps, is to get out of the theatre of dominance of the AI...say, off planet? Absent (or possibly with) discovering advanced life that matches or rivals our own that seek a mutual partnership, the best option would likely be to grow beyond that sphere of AI dominance, preferrably long before it has established itself (so, in a way, I guess I am saying "run" for now but with the foresight to realize that while we are "running", the human species continues to evolve - increasing intellect, experience and species maturity).
I like to think that we are growing outward into the solar system at this very moment (and possibly beyond), not necessarily because of the probability of a malevolent AI surfacing in the future, but to ensure continued genetic evolution, expression and technological progress through planetary diversification...chance favors the prepared, as it were. Unfortunately, perhaps due to antiquated beliefs or the fact there really is no rigorous effort underway, I don't see the latter taking place in the public domain.
