I believe it is acceptable and even desirable to use AI or robots in ways and magnitude that fringe into servitude. I do not agree with the notion of comparing using an inanimate technology to exploitation. I also don’t think AI and robots are being forced into serving humans because as of now, they do not possess any other desires that can be forcibly suppressed in favour of servitude for humans.
Although we fear the lack of human contact that could result from being surrounded by robots, for some tasks, many would prefer machines rather than humans. This to me captures the purpose and motivation behind having AI or robots perfectly. AI was never imagined to be something that should enjoy the same fundamental rights as the living beings on this planet do. It was conceptualized as a tool to do things for us in an efficient and intelligent manner. Any AI technology should be treated like the resource it is and not as a mortal being. And as is the case with the consumption of any resource, we should be responsible and careful so as to not run it into scarcity or extinction. For me, the question is not whether AI or robots are being forcibly exploited into our service but it is whether or not we are enjoying the services of these ever-improving tools sustainably.
The important thing to always keep in mind when thinking about AI is that it is fundamentally different from any form of life on the planet. There may be increasing efforts in making robots like humans but it is hard to see how these robots can be induced with human consciousness. There has been significant support for the argument that consciousness can only arise and exist in biological matter. And therefore, it is hard to imagine AI robots having human emotions. My point is that an entity being forced into servitude is dangerous if it is capable of damage and has the ability to feel vengeful or angry. While there is no denying the fact that AI can very well inflict great damage to mankind as well as this planet but I doubt that it will do it because of how it was treated unfairly by its “masters”. If the act of using AI relentlessly does not by itself warrant any retaliation then I don’t see any reason to act restrained in this regard.
Singularity or The Intelligence Explosion are popular notions in both the world of scientific research and pop-culture. There is a myriad of arguments that argue against the possibility of a singularity like The Anthropocentric Argument (surpassing human intellect is not some milestone beyond which anything is possible), The Metaintelligence Argument (emphasizing that the capability of doing a task well does not necessarily lead to an improvement in this capability) and The Limits of Intelligence Argument (questioning if there is a limit to intelligence in any form). It is unclear or even doubtful that singularity is a possibility and even if it is possible, there are arguments that it will not directly and immediately imply catastrophe. But even if we assume what science fiction has always offered to be true and believe that singularity means disaster for/ extinction of the human race, then doesn’t it mean that our future is sealed regardless of how we treat AI now? What difference will our current behavior make to a dystopian future where AI will deem humans as a non-necessity and wipe us from the face of the earth?
In conclusion, I think AI and robots are built to serve humans and there is nothing wrong with being strict in our use of AI as long as we are responsible for the sustainable consumption of this and other resources on our planet. There are many considerations before assuming that AI will eventually become supreme and render our species obsolete. But even if such assumptions are to be made out of extreme caution, I think such destruction is contingent upon how we develop artificial intelligence or how we use it and not how severely we force it into servitude.
No comments:
Post a Comment