AI Is not Just a Threat: “The Proposal Is to Assume Collective Responsibility”, Sicilia Writes in Forbes
Written by Adrian Sicilia, technologist and author of the book Digital Pilgrims, this column published in Forbes Latin America proposes an alternative view to apocalyptic readings of artificial intelligence.
Here, we present an English version of the article you can read here in its original language:
An alternative look at the digital apocalypse of AI
By Adrián Sicilia
for Forbes (translated by Digital Pilgrims)
The date May 30, 2023 will be remembered in the debates on Artificial Intelligence (AI). That day, a list of experts including the developers of this technology themselves express to the public the risks it brings, in extreme language: they speak of extinction, and equate it to nuclear wars and global pandemics.
Three years after the pandemic that had all of humanity thinking about threats to the species, we find ourselves in the midst of a whirlwind of technological advances. The star of all of them, born from the developments of Machine Learning, is the possibility that a General Artificial Intelligence will appear soon. That is, a digital species capable of thinking and acting for itself, of planning and carrying out a complex series of tasks and projects.
The aforementioned letter states that mitigating the “risk” posed by AI should be considered a global priority. It can only be mitigated, indicates the brief message signed by a long list of protagonists in recent developments. Among the signatures, we find the name of the CEO of Google DeepMind, Demis Hassabis, responsible for famous developments such as Alpha Go Zero or Alpha Tensor; also, the signature of Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI and responsible for the versions of Chat GPT.
However, there is another way to interpret these undoubtedly historical events, which instead of being based on fear are based on recognizing a challenge. The possibility of the emergence of a self-aware AI, what is called the singularity, invites us to strengthen something we can call “digital urbanism”. What does that mean?
First, let’s reflect on this phenomenon and positions like the one expressed in that letter with the keys that our own history provides us:
“Historically, every time we have been faced with an unknown or misunderstood phenomenon, we have resorted to idealization through two methods: assuming something is divine or demonic. Ancient humans, who feared lightning and fire, made them divine. Later, when our cultural evolution allowed us to understand the physical and material nature of both phenomena, they were no longer considered divine elements, and that quality was shifted elsewhere. It is possible to trace the relationship we have developed with different phenomena throughout the history of our species.”
The proposal is to assume collective responsibility and take the reins that point the way to these developments.
“…if we are considering the possibility of a self-aware digital species, the question of coexistence is not only an issue to be resolved so that our online experiences are constructive and pleasant. The big issue is what kind of artificial intelligence we are developing. AI is not a monster in itself, but it can become one if all the input it receives from people and all the material it uses to learn are made up of the worst we have as humanity. How can we expect or hope that this possible new species will be empathetic with human beings if it only knows the worst of us?”
Far from a moralistic view, I recognize here and now an invitation to redefine our digital presence as a society. We need a new definition of urban planning, linked to the ability to build digital rituals and ceremonies through which to empower the human factor.
“So far, we have relegated all our darkness to the Digital Environment and stripped it of any drive for the common good. The call to create new models of habitability and coexistence is also a call to stop creating monsters. We must move away from the self-fulfilling prophecy. We have the ability to create models of urbanity that integrate the Digital Environment, which is, in the end, a way of integrating our existence. That part of ourselves that we lock away in the digital sphere is, indeed, a part of ourselves. Just as the process that approaches is one of convergence, the challenge will be to shape that New Habitat. Becoming digital urbanists means finding a way to move our baggage of coexistence and urbanity, and finding its new shape. Maybe there, we will be able to see a new possibility for a better future, but it will take work.”
The reflections cited in this column belong to fragments of the book “Digital Pilgrims: Towards a Quantum Humanity”, by Adrián Sicilia.
The author, a technologist and digital planner of Italian-Argentine origin, has lived most of his life in Europe, where he has forged his professional career. He is currently CEO of In All Media, a global technology company headquartered in Austin, Texas. The book is distributed free of charge and can be downloaded electronically from the website digitalpilgrims.org. It is also available as an audiobook and as a podcast series (in its original language).
