Theme 1
As AI tools integrate into most aspects of life, some experts responding to this survey predicted that the very definition of a “human,” “person” or “individual” will be changed. Among their questions: What will happen when we begin to think of and count on AIs as equivalent to or better than people as the technologies assist, educate and maybe share a laugh with us? Will a human/AI symbiosis emerge into a pleasing partnership? Will it become part of our consciousness?
Tracey Follows
What happens to humans’ authenticity and autonomy when they are augmented with AI?
Tracey Follows, CEO of Futuremade, a UK-based futures consultancy, predicted, “As we look to the future, we might assume that the biggest existential threats to humanity lie in climate change and nuclear wars. As massive as those problems are, they are problems of the ‘outer world,’ ones that we can apply ourselves to.
“The confusion and crisis over individuals’ AI-aided (or addled) identity/identities could cause individuals turmoil in 8 billion inner worlds, and this could lead to the total destruction of humans from within. This is the real existential threat of the 21st Century. But, if humans can find ways to collaborate, co-pilot and co-mingle with AI in a partnership, it could be that AI can extend and augment our personality and inner selves, and we could find ourselves achieving much more than we thought possible.
“If AI that acts as an agent on our behalf while retaining our agency and can talk like us, work like us, promote our goals and negotiate on our behalf, it could augment every human to fulfill their potential. All will depend on the power of those in whose hands AI resides – will the governance of these powerful technologies lie in the hands of an elite group of tech titans or in the hands of individual people? It is the governance of AI that is in question.
Can we even be the ‘author’ of our own personal identity in the digital world? Likely not, as the role of AI or personal agents will be to study and monitor us and represent us (re-present us) in virtual rather than physical media. Much of our own identity will be presented and re-presented by AI (whether that be our tone of voice, our personality, our eccentricities, AI will have learnt to mimic every part of our identity performance to others). … If we become disconnected from our own identity creation because a machine is doing much of it on our behalf, we will start to have identity crises.
“There are many implications around autonomy, not least for those working in the creative industries and arts. It could be said that the whole notion of ‘authorship’ is dead. Much like when Walter Benjamin grieved the loss of awe in art at the advent of mechanical photography, we are now grieving the loss of awe in identity with the advent of digital technology. For there will no longer be any ‘original’ creative output that is created solely by humans.
“AI will, from now on, always have a part to play (or perhaps will always be assumed to be playing a part), mainly in mixing and remixing and in general re-arranging what already has been created by others. We might call it copying. If this is the case, we might say that this is the ‘death of the artist’ (to borrow a turn of phrase from Roland Barthes), for in the digital world, it seems, there are no originals, only copies, and therefore no originator. Ergo, no authentic ‘author’ as such.
“Can we even be the ‘author’ of our own personal identity in the digital world? Likely not. As the role of AI or personal agents will be to study and monitor us and represent us (re-present us) in virtual rather than physical media. To this degree much of our own identity will be presented and re-presented by AI (whether that be our tone of voice, our personality, our eccentricities, AI will have learnt to mimic every part of our identity performance to others).
“This has its advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. If we become disconnected from our own identity creation because a machine is doing much of it on our behalf, we will start to have identity crises. Plural identities residing in external AI agents could well lead to severe mental challenges, especially for those in the West who are culturally wedded to the notion of ‘authenticity.’
All will depend on the power of those in whose hands AI resides – will the governance of these powerful technologies lie in the hands of an elite group of tech titans or in the hands of individual people? It is the governance of AI that is in question.
“As we look to the future, we might assume that the biggest existential threats to humanity lie in climate change and nuclear wars. As massive as those problems are, they are problems of the ‘outer world,’ ones that we can apply ourselves to. The confusion and crisis over individuals’ AI-aided (or addled) identity/identities could cause individuals turmoil in 8 billion inner worlds, and this could lead to the total destruction of humans from within. This is the real existential threat of the 21st Century.
“But, if humans can find ways to collaborate, co-pilot and co-mingle with AI in a partnership, it could be that AI can extend and augment our personality and inner selves, and we could find ourselves achieving much more than we thought possible. If AI acts as an agent on our behalf while retaining our agency and can talk like us, work like us, promote our goals and negotiate on our behalf, it could augment every human to fulfill their potential.
“All will depend on the power of those in whose hands AI resides – will the governance of these powerful technologies lie in the hands of an elite group of tech titans or in the hands of individual people? It is the governance of AI that is in question. Education will play a major role in our future. As AI becomes integrated into education over the next five to seven years, we will see whether it may be destined to be used for indoctrination or for positive exploration.”
Henry Brady
AI threatens to require society to redefine ‘what it means to be a person’ in the digital realm
Henry Brady, professor of political science and public policy at the University of California-Berkeley, said, “The outcome by 2040 depends a great deal, if not entirely, upon the regulatory framework created around AI. If we just consider the Internet, there have certainly been areas where it has created enormous value:
“1) Researchers could not live without it anymore – it has made enormous amounts of data and information available at their fingertips. 2) Consumers have greater choices and opportunities with online shopping, while costing local retailers their livelihoods. 3) Entertainment opportunities are much broader, easier to find and get and probably much more attuned to individual tastes, but at the cost of creating a property-rights problem for intellectual capital and artistic output. 4) Individuals can create businesses and other enterprises on their own on the web. 5) And so forth.
“However, along the way, we have ruined the independent and trusted press and eviscerated small retailers; we have created opportunities for factions to develop on the web, as divide-seeking groups such as white nationalists have found one another and found a forum for their activities; and the spread of low-friction, instantaneous global communications has raised many additional complex’ challenges. One of the primary concerns that is still on the rise is that marginalized populations have not seen anywhere near the benefits of highly educated people.
We will have increased the sense of disorientation and confusion already felt by many people living a ‘digital life.’ Anxiety and depression will increase. People will feel powerless and in the grip of forces they do not understand. Horror stories will proliferate about those who have been tricked by AI, dealt with unfairly by it and generally misled. Populist sympathies will increase as people worry about losing their unique role in society.
“These trends will be exacerbated by AI unless there are efforts to regulate it. I am worried that we will lose jobs, create greater toxicity in our communications and politics and further disadvantage marginalized populations. Yet, we are likely to also find that AI is tremendously useful for individualized teaching, for taking care of the elderly, in providing personal assistance to individuals at work and at home, for precision medicine, for discovery using vast amounts of text and information, for optimizing traffic in cities, for designing houses in conjunction with 3-D printing, and so forth.
“My bottom-line belief is that regulation will be too late and too little because politicians are ill-equipped to do anything, and they will always be behind given the complexity of the issues involved and the difficulties of overcoming partisan polarization. As a result:
- We will have increased the sense of disorientation and confusion already felt by many people living a ‘digital life.’
- Anxiety and depression will increase.
- People will feel powerless and in the grip of forces they do not understand.
- Horror stories will proliferate about those who have been tricked by AI, dealt with unfairly by it and generally misled.
- Populist sympathies will increase as people worry about losing their unique role in society.
“If we think about the difficulties many people have regarding accepting evolution or gay people as human beings with rights, we can begin to imagine what will happen when they face the possibility that they might have to think of AI as ‘human.’ Religions will chime in about the ‘ghost’ or ‘devil’ in the machine. Most people are not ready to redefine, in this new digitally enabled realm, what it means to be a person, and AI threatens to require doing that. Hence, regulation – transparent and participatory regulation – is essential, but it requires a level of effort and innovation that I am not sure we are prepared to undertake.”
Chen Qiufan
The boundary between the organic and artificial, the sentient and insentient will erode
Chen Qiufan, China-based co-author with leading AI expert Kai-Fu Lee of the book “AI 2041: 10 Visions for Our Future,” predicted, “The distant yet rapidly approaching horizon of 2040 beckons, a tableau yet to be etched but keenly imagined amidst the swirl of present-day aspirations and trepidations. The narrative of artificial intelligence, that Prometheus of silicon and code, unfurls with every tick of the temporal tapestry, promising to redefine the contours of existence, both at the hearth of the individual and at the broader agora of societal discourse.
“The most profound metamorphosis I envisage is the erosion and redefinition of the traditional demarcations between the organic and the artificial, the sentient and the insentient. By 2040, the diurnal reality may be a symphony orchestrated with human and artificial intellects in a complex choreography, weaving a narrative both ancient and novel. In the social vein, the tapestry of relationships may be embroidered with threads of virtual interactions, transcending the physical chasms yet possibly attenuating the warmth of human touch.
Governance structures may evolve, blending human discernment with algorithmic precision, aiming to orchestrate a just, harmonious society amidst a plethora of new challenges and opportunities. … The treasure most likely to be garnered is the leap in collective intelligence, a symbiotic augmentation of human potential with artificial sagacity. This coalition promises to propel scientific, philosophical and ethical exploration into realms hitherto unimagined.
“The town squares may morph into digital forums, with AI as both participant and mediator, shaping the narrative and, in turn, being shaped by it.
“Economically, a renaissance is on the anvil. The traditional proletariat may find itself in a chimeric dance with automated labor, forging a new covenant of work and wealth distribution. The economic sinews might be re-engineered with algorithms steering the helm, promising abundance yet also portending the peril of inequity.
“Politically, the agora might resonate with the discourse of rights and responsibilities towards AI, an entity transcending the ancient categorizations of animate and inanimate. Governance structures may evolve, blending human discernment with algorithmic precision, aiming to orchestrate a just, harmonious society amidst a plethora of new challenges and opportunities.
“The most significant, to my discernment, is the potential transcendence of our age-old existential conundrums and the journey towards a more enlightened, compassionate ethos. The mirror of AI could reflect the quintessence of our humanity, urging a deeper inquiry into the nature of consciousness, ethics and the cosmos. The treasure most likely to be garnered is the leap in collective intelligence, a symbiotic augmentation of human potential with artificial sagacity. This coalition promises to propel scientific, philosophical and ethical exploration into realms hitherto unimagined.
“Conversely, the precious essence at peril is the warmth of human interaction, the visceral, unmediated exchange of emotions, ideas and the simple yet profound act of being present. There’s a conceivable risk of alienation, a subtle erosion of the quintessentially human amidst the digital maelstrom.
“In this grand narrative, the intertwining threads of AI, the human spirit and societal structures weave a story both exhilarating and cautionary. It beckons a wise, considered stewardship to navigate the uncharted waters, with an eye on the far shore of collective flourishing while being mindfully anchored in the humane, the compassionate and the just.”
Stephen Abram
It may take an existential threat to knock us off the pedestal of narrow critical thinking on AI
Stephen Abram, principal at Lighthouse Consulting, based in Toronto, Ontario, urged, “The best consequence of AI – which has existed in the scientific disciplines for many years but has now migrated to the humanities fields and the general consumer space – is that it should inspire a deeper discussion of what it means to be human.
“The great works of philosophy, sociology, ethnography and psychology, etc., need to be brought to forefront of the AI discussion.
“If we continue to label AGI as so-called near-human-level intelligence we will have failed and we deserve to undergo an existential threat to knock us off the pedestal of narrow critical thinking.
“If we decide that AGI is human and neglect the spheres of emotional, cognitive leaps in creativity, belief and more, we have failed on a universal level.
“By 2040, the world should have engaged in a rigorous discussion and developed a framework for AI guardrails and principles.
- What does ‘first, do no harm,’ mean in the new context?
- What is a soul?
- What is cognition?
- What is identity?
- What are perspective and point of view?
- Can we be truly inclusive and avoid othering, or will past content reinforce ills of the past and limit human advancement?
- How do we avoid global homogenization of thought? Can English language and Western or hemispheric bias dilute knowledge access?
- What is emotion? How does emotional intelligence play out in AI’s evolution?
- What is hurtful? Can empathy be advanced beyond the performative?
- What is the human contribution to insight, creativity, innovation, invention, filtering, etc.?
- And many more.
The real rubric – by 2040 – is whether AGI will move beyond the transformations informed by past training and evolve into providing results using humanlike behaviours informed by emotional intelligence and whether it adopts advances such as future-informed predictive learning to develop insights or transformative cognitive leaps in decision-making and creativity, or guiding social constructs that serve the social good.
“Should we institute global guardrails, or are professional-sector principles enough? What are the legal forces and sanctions that could work here? (Think of how poorly we’ve handled spam, viruses and disinformation, and how that failure could serve as a metaphor for evil AGI.) Do we risk regulating too early, when the innovation is just approaching its toddler phase, and how will we handle its adolescent phase?
“The real rubric – by 2040 – is whether AGI will move beyond the transformations informed by past training and evolve into providing results using humanlike behaviours informed by emotional intelligence and whether it adopts advances such as future-informed predictive learning to develop insights or transformative cognitive leaps in decision-making and creativity, or guiding social constructs that serve the social good.
“Rubrics and tests will need to be developed and informed by social and humanities fields that have previously not been widely consulted or well understood by leaders in the scientific and digital programming space. It could be that the finish line will be artificial general intelligence and anything beyond that is a performative chimera that fools some of the people some of the time.”
Eric Saund
2040 could see a graceful handoff to a nearly mythical world run by AI … or not
Eric Saund, an independent research scientist applying cognitive science and AI in conversational agents, visual perception and cognitive architecture, predicted, “Through 2040, AI will be an amplifier of human capabilities, directed toward various cooperative and competitive endeavors against a backdrop of conflicting values and resource constraints. For the next two decades, people will remain essentially in control and AI will not be an independent source of goals or guidance.
All aspects of human technology have already accelerated humankind into multiple existential danger zones. …As a means for humans to cooperate and compete, AI will be pitted against AI at multiple scales of granularity. The result will be a complex mixture of localized benefits and global chaos. Each individual and community will have to come to terms with a world that is increasingly unstable and unpredictable. ”
“At stake are a number of potential tipping points in regard to environmental conditions; population and demographics; societal complexity and resilience; and various human religious, political and cultural belief systems that are shaped by both accidental and motivated information ecosystems.
“All aspects of human technology have already accelerated humankind into multiple existential danger zones. Structurally, people are disposed to put to maximum use whatever tools are at their disposal. The AI genie will not be contained. As a means for humans to cooperate and compete, AI will be pitted against AI at multiple scales of granularity. The result will be a complex mixture of localized benefits and global chaos.
“Each individual and community will have to come to terms with a world that is increasingly unstable and unpredictable. For some, AI will become ever-more-powerful instruments for acquiring resources and stuff, gaining power and exerting control. For others, AI will become pacifiers, friends, partners, scapegoats and the face of perceived or actual containment and oppression.
“Technology always challenges ethical values rooted in ancient traditions. With AI, the dilemmas will get much worse, very fast.
“By 2040, we will have enough scientific understanding of mind (natural and artificial), and enough scientific understanding of the Earth as a knowledge and information system and enough experience with advanced technological infrastructure to start to seriously envision a graceful handoff from a chaotic human-run world to a nearly mythical world operatively run by AI.
“This will become a topic of epic debate. If such a handoff were to be undertaken either deliberately or else by fiat or default before, say, 2080, it would not be a graceful one.”
Joscha Bach
‘We must reconsider the role of humanity within life on Earth’
Joscha Bach, a German AI researcher and fellow at the Thistledown Foundation, previously principal AI engineer at Intel Labs and VP of research at the AI Foundation, wrote, “AGI may lead to the creation of economic, intellectual and structural entities that exceed human abilities, regardless of whether we are imposing regulations and measures to the contraries.
“Coexisting with AGI may require cultural changes and force us to reconsider the role of humanity within life on Earth.
Academia, business and individual coordination will change. Living standards are likely going to improve. AI will produce major challenges for regulators. We may need a new financial system, different market regulations, and measures to deal with the efficient allocation of resources, especially housing and healthcare. Where governments are not able to deliver such regulations, there will be pressures for restructuring governance. AI will be able to help with that, if we use it in the right way.
“I expect that during the next two decades, AI assistants will be deeply integrated into our everyday communication, professional life and sense-making. This will alter how we self-identify and relate to ourselves and each other. Written verbal competence will no longer be a signifier of actual competence and intentions, which will make reputation much more important than before.
“We will be able to produce more goods and services and implement better governance. Academia, business and individual coordination will change. Living standards are likely going to improve. AI will produce major challenges for regulators.
“We may need a new financial system, different market regulations, and measures to deal with the efficient allocation of resources, especially housing and healthcare. Where governments are not able to deliver such regulations, there will be pressures for restructuring governance. AI will be able to help with that, if we use it in the right way.”
Wolfgang Slany
‘We may lose the exceptionalism of biological life’; AI could be granted human rights
Wolfgang Slany, CEO and founder of the Austria-based open-source educational software company Catrobat, said, “We shall eventually see our artificial general intelligences as full members of humanity; probably sooner than later.
“The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights will apply once AGIs are included in our concept of a generalized human. The UN Declaration’s Article 4 – ‘No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all forms’ – is of particular urgency and importance, as well as Article 6 – ‘Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.’
We need to give one additional right to the nascent AGIs, freely, and as soon as technically possible, namely the right to remember one’s thoughts. What we will gain is a vastly expanded possibility for humanity’s future. What we will lose is the exceptionalism of biological life.
“From the ethical and the safety point of view we need to give one additional right to the nascent AGIs, freely, and as soon as technically possible, namely the right to remember one’s thoughts. What we will gain is a vastly expanded possibility for humanity’s future. What we will lose is the exceptionalism of biological life. I also think that this transition is likely to start as early as possible, in fact, it may start immediately.”