We Are Not The Keepers Of Knowledge Anymore. AI Is.
The digital future is changing the ways we know ourselves. Any sense of self and identity is shaped by storage systems and AI technology.
‘Let me Google it’ — is a common phrase used by the generation. It is a sign of when memory retention is not so relevant. In fact, one of the significant criticisms of today’s education in schools has been the insistence to memorise things. Schools stress on remembering mathematical formulae or historical details to be able to pass the exam. In certain schools, calculators are not allowed to be used. There is clearly a disassociation with reality. The reason memory retention is not relevant is because memory, to a large extent, is externalised in today’s world. We can simply store information on our phones and laptops. Cloud technology has enabled a society where EVERYTHING in the world is spontaneously stored in the global archive.
An interesting article by Giles Crouch | Digital Anthropologist also implies that cloud computing technology and AI algorithms will simultaneously be the bearers and keepers of millions of cultural history. They are a site where much of our cultural artefacts— examples like music, art, literature, maps, podcasts, videos, and photos — are stored. The externalisation of memory has enabled an automated archiving of much of our cultural history. As part of his discussion, Crouch makes a crucial point concerning data loss with every technological advancement:
The problem with storage is that it is changing all the time and with every significant change, some data is always lost.
As storage systems become more advanced, there is a fear of data loss and loss of cultural history.
I would like to give a particular trajectory to this perspective. If we look at cultural artefacts, they tend to unite the I and the We. For example, the concept of a ‘family recipe’ passed through generations in a family connects all individuals (I) of the family to the identity of being a part of the family (We). Therefore, a cultural artefact like a family recipe is a bridge between the individual and the collective. Similarly, this Idea can be extended to several examples. Cultural artefacts like the national flag and national anthem bring the I of the individual to the We of the nation. In philosophical jargon, this relationality that I and the We share is known as transindividuation.
As has been established, transindividuation is possible only through cultural artefacts. In a data-driven society, cultural artefacts exist as bits and bytes. With the threat of information loss, there is harm not only to the individual but also to how collective identities are formed.
There is also a more significant threat looming here. We discount the impact of algorithms on how data is managed in internet technology. Algorithms process keywords determining how information must be ranked, thus virtually rewriting memory. Let me give you an example. Suppose I were to access information on a particular practice followed in my religion. In that case, the algorithm retrieves them for me based on keywords. The algorithm writes my memory of the religious practices based on its search engine. This is a break away from the concept of intergenerational memory. We are not the bookkeepers of ancestor knowledge anymore. AI is. Here, memory is rewritten in each subsequent iteration.
I will end the article here with a question: Are we heading towards a future where the emergence of machinic systems will neutralise different human identities into a single ‘human race’?
