By Eric Vandenbroeck and co-workers
The Ramifications Of Artificial
Intelligence Part One
In the annals of
human history, some moments stand out as turning points with the coming wave of
technology that includes advanced AI and biotechnology.
Never before have we witnessed technologies with such transformative potential,
promising to reshape our world in awe-inspiring and daunting ways.
Artificial
intelligence (AI) is the intelligence of machines or software, as opposed to
the intelligence of humans or animals. It is also the field of computer science
that develops and studies intelligent machines. "AI" may also refer
to the machines themselves.
In April 2023, a
group of academics at Carnegie Mellon University set out
to test the chemistry powers of artificial intelligence. To do so, they
connected an AI system to a hypothetical laboratory. Then, they asked it to
produce various substances. With just two words of guidance—“synthesize
ibuprofen”—the chemists got the system to identify the steps necessary for
laboratory machines to manufacture the painkiller. As it turned out, the AI
knew both the recipe for ibuprofen and how to produce it. Unfortunately, the
researchers quickly discovered that their AI tool would synthesize chemicals far more dangerous
than Advil.
A select few
artificial intelligences we used to call organizations will massively benefit
from a new concentration of ability—probably the greatest such concentration
yet seen. Re-creating the essence of what’s made our species so successful into
tools that can be reused and reapplied over and over in myriad different
settings is a mighty prize that corporations and bureaucracies of all kinds
will pursue and wield. How these entities are governed and how they will rub
against, capture, and reengineer the state is an open question. That they will
challenge it seems inevitable. But the consequences of greater concentrations
of power don’t end with corporations.
Previously, the tools
available to totalitarian governments weren’t equal to the task. So, those
governments failed to improve the quality of life or eventually collapsed or
reformed. Extreme concentration wasn’t just highly undesirable; it was
practically impossible.
The coming wave
presents the disturbing possibility that this may no longer be true. Instead,
it could initiate an injection of centralized power and control that will morph
state functions into repressive distortions of their original purpose—rocket
fuel for authoritarians and great power competition. The ability to capture and
harness data at an extraordinary scale and precision; to create
territory-spanning systems of surveillance and control, reacting in real-time;
to put, in other words, history’s most robust set of technologies under the
command of a single body, would rewrite the limits of state power so
comprehensively that it would produce a new kind of entity altogether.
Immediately, you turn
to your phone and check your emails. Your smartwatch tells you you’ve slept
normally and your heart rate is average for the morning. Already, a distant
organization knows, in theory, what time you are awake, how you are feeling,
and what you are looking at. You leave the house and head to the office, your
phone tracking your movements, logging the keystrokes on your text messages and
the podcast you listen to. On the way and throughout the day, you are captured
on CCTV hundreds of times. After all, this city has at least one camera for
every ten people, maybe many more than that. When you swipe in at the office,
the system notes your time of entry. Software installed on your computer
monitors productivity down to eye movements.
On the way home, you
stop to buy dinner. The supermarket’s loyalty scheme tracks your purchases.
After eating, you binge-stream another TV series; your viewing habits are duly
noted. Every glance, every hurried message, every half thought registered in an
open browser or fleeting search, every step through bustling city streets,
every heartbeat and bad night’s sleep, every purchase made or backed out of—it
is all captured, watched, tabulated. And this is only a tiny slice of the
possible data harvested daily, not just at work or on the phone, but at the
doctor’s office or the gym. Almost every detail of life is logged somewhere by
those with the sophistication to process and act on the data they collect. This
is not some far-off dystopia.
The only step left is
bringing these disparate databases together into a single, integrated system: a
perfect twenty-first-century surveillance apparatus. The preeminent example is,
of course, China. That’s hardly news, but what’s become clear is how advanced
and ambitious the party’s program is, let alone where it might end up in twenty
or thirty years.
Compared with the
West, Chinese research into AI concentrates on surveillance areas like object
tracking, scene understanding, and voice or action recognition. Surveillance
technologies are ubiquitous and increasingly granular in their ability to home
in every aspect of citizens’ lives. They combine visual recognition of faces,
gaits, and license plates with data collection—including bio-data—on a mass
scale. Centralized services like WeChat bundle everything from private
messaging to shopping and banking in one easily traceable place. Drive the
highways of China, and you’ll notice hundreds of Automatic Number Plate
Recognition cameras tracking vehicles. (These exist in most large urban areas
in the Western world, too.) During COVID quarantines, robot dogs and drones
carried speakers blasting messages warning people to stay inside.
Facial recognition
software builds on the advances in computer vision, identifying individual
faces with exquisite accuracy. When I open my phone, it automatically starts
upon “seeing” my face: a small but slick convenience with evident and profound
implications. Although the system was initially developed by corporate and
academic researchers in the United States, nowhere embraced or perfected the
technology more than in China.
Around half the
world’s billion CCTV cameras are in China. Many have built-in facial
recognition and are carefully positioned to gather maximal information, often
in quasi-private spaces: residential buildings, hotels, and even karaoke
lounges. A New York Times investigation found the police in Fujian Province
alone estimated they held a database of 2.5 billion facial images. They were
candid about its purpose: “controlling and managing people.” Authorities are
also looking to suck in audio data—police in the city of Zhongshan wanted
cameras that could record audio within a three-hundred-foot radius—and close
monitoring and storage of bio-data became routine in the COVID era.
Societies of
overweening surveillance and control are
already here, and now all of this is set to escalate enormously into a
next-level concentration of power at the center. Yet, it would be a mistake to
write this off as just a Chinese or authoritarian problem. This tech is being
exported wholesale to places like Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Ecuador, and Ethiopia,
even in the United States. In 2019, the U.S. government banned federal agencies and
contractors from buying telecommunications and surveillance equipment from
several Chinese providers, including Huawei, ZTE, and Hikvision. Yet, just a
year later, three federal agencies were found to have bought such equipment
from prohibited vendors. More than one
hundred U.S. towns have even acquired technology developed by the Uighurs
in Xinjiang. A textbook failure of containment.
In short, critical
parts of modern society and social organization that today rely on scale and
centralization could be radically devolved by capabilities unlocked with the
coming wave. Mass rebellion, secessionism, and state formation look very
different. Redistributing real power means communities of all kinds can live as
they wish, whether they are ISIS, FARC, Anonymous, secessionists from Biafra to
Catalonia, or a major corporation building luxury theme parks on a remote
island in the Pacific.
The Cost Of AI Products
The most significant
AI models will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to train; consequently, few
will have ownership. But paradoxically, a countertrend will play out in
parallel. AI breakthroughs already make their way into open-source code
repositories within days of being published in open-access journals, making
top-flight models easy for anyone to access, experiment with, build, and
modify. Models down to the weights are published, leaked, and stolen.
Companies like
Stability AI and Hugging Face accelerate distributed, decentralized forms of
AI. Techniques like CRISPR make biological experimentation easier, meaning
biohackers in their garages can tinker at the absolute frontier of science.
Ultimately, sharing or copying DNA or the code of a large language model is
trivial. Openness is the default; imitations are endemic, cost curves
relentlessly go down, and barriers to access crumble. Exponential capabilities
are given to anyone who wants them.
This heralds a
colossal redistribution of power away from existing centers. Imagine a future
where small groups—whether in failing states like Lebanon or off-grid nomad
camps in New Mexico—provide AI-empowered services like credit unions, schools,
and health care, services at the heart of the community often reliant on the
scale or the state. The chance to set society's terms at a micro level becomes
irresistible: come to our boutique school and avoid critical race theory
forever, or boycott the evil financial system and use our DeFi product. Any
grouping—ideological, religious, cultural, racial—can self-organize a viable
society. Think about setting up your school. Or hospital or army. It’s such a
complex, vast, and challenging project. Even the thought of it is tiring.
Gathering the resources getting necessary permissions and equipment, is a
lifelong endeavor. Now consider having an array of assistants who, when asked
to create a school, a hospital, or an army, can make it happen in a realistic
time frame.
Fragmentations could
occur all over. What if companies themselves start down a journey of becoming
states? Or do cities decide to break away and gain more autonomy? What if
people spend more time, money, and emotional energy in virtual worlds than the
real ones? What happens to traditional hierarchies when tools of incredible
power and expertise are as available to street children as to billionaires?
It’s already a remarkable fact that corporate titans spend most of their lives
working on software like Gmail or Excel, accessible to most people. Extend that
radically with democratizing empowerment when everyone has unfettered access to
the most powerful technologies ever built.
A Fragmented World
A fragmented world is
one where some jurisdictions are far more permissive about human
experimentation than others, where pockets of advanced bio-capabilities and
self-modification produce divergent outcomes at the level of DNA, which in turn
have divergent effects at the levels of states and microstates. There could
then be a biohacking personal enhancement arms race. A country desperate for
investment or advantage might see potential in becoming an anything-goes
biohacker paradise. What does the social contract look like if a select group
of “post-humans” engineer themselves to some unreachable intellectual or
physical plane? How would this intersect with the dynamic of fragmenting
politics, some enclaves trying to leave the whole behind?
A Pre-nation-State World?
Something like the pre-nation-state
world emerges in this scenario: neo-medieval, smaller, more local, and
constitutionally diverse, a complex, unstable patchwork of polities—only this
time with hugely influential technology. When northern Italy was a patchwork of
small city-states, it gave us the Renaissance, yet it was also a field of
constant internecine war and feuding. Renaissance is great; unceasing war with
tomorrow’s military technology, not so much.
For many people
working in or adjacent to technology, these radical outcomes are not just
unwelcome by-products; they’re the goal itself. Hyper-libertarian technologists
like the PayPal founder and venture capitalist Peter Thiel celebrate a vision
of the state withering away, seeing this as liberation for an overmighty
species of business leaders or “sovereign individuals,” as they call
themselves. A bonfire
of public services, institutions, and norms is cheered on with an explicit
vision where technology might “create the space for new modes of dissent and
new ways to form communities not bounded by historical nation-states.”
This is a world where
billionaires and latter-day prophets can build and run microstates, where
non-state actors, from corporations to communes to algorithms, begin to
overshadow the state from above and below. Think again of the stirrup and the
profound downstream effects of a single, simple invention. And then think of
the scale of the invention in the coming wave. Coupled with the existing
pressures and fragility, sweeping change in the order of my speculation above
doesn’t seem so far out. What would be stranger is no radical change at all.
The World Of Contradictions
If centralization and
decentralization sound as if they are in direct contradiction, that’s with good
reason: they are. Understanding the future means handling multiple conflicting
trajectories at once. The coming wave launches immense centralizing and decentralizing
riptides at the same time. Both will be in play at once. Every individual,
every business, every church, every nonprofit, and every nation will eventually
have its own AI and, ultimately, bio and robotics capability. From a single
individual on their sofa to the world’s largest organizations, each AI will aim
to achieve its owner's goals. Herein lies the key to understanding the coming
wave of contradictions, a wave full of collisions.
Each new power
formulation will offer a different vision of delivering public goods or propose
another way to make products or a different set of religious beliefs to
evangelize. AI systems already make critical decisions with overt political
implications: who receives a loan, a job, a place at college, parole, who gets
seen by a senior physician. Within the decade, AIs will decide how public money
gets spent, where military forces are assigned, or what students should learn.
This will occur in both centralizing and decentralizing ways. An AI might, for
example, operate as one massive, state-spanning system, a single
general-purpose utility governing hundreds of millions. Equally, we will also
have vastly capable systems, available at low cost, open-source, highly
adapted, catering to a village.
Multiple ownership
structures will exist in tandem: technology democratized in open-source
collectives, the products of today’s corporate leaders or insurgent
blitz-scaling start-ups, and government-held, whether through nationalization
or in-house nurturing. All will coexist and coevolve, and everywhere, they will
alter, magnify, produce, and disrupt flows and networks of power.
Where and how the
forces play out will vary dramatically according to existing social and
political factors. This should not be an oversimplified picture, and numerous
points of resistance and adaptation will not be evident in advance. Some
sectors or regions will go one way, some the other; some will see powerful
contortions of both. Some hierarchies and social structures will be reinforced;
others overturned; some places may become more equal or authoritarian, others
much less so. In all cases, the additional stress and volatility, the
unpredictable amplification of power, and the wrenching disruption of radical
new centers of capability will further stress the foundation of the liberal
democratic nation-state system.
The coming wave will
only deepen and recapitulate the same contradictory dynamics of the last wave.
The internet precisely does this: centralizes in a few critical hubs while
empowering billions of people. It creates behemoths and yet allows everyone to join
in. Social media made a few giants and a million tribes. Everyone can build a
website, but there’s only one Google. Everyone can sell their niche products,
but only one Amazon exists. And on and on. This tension, this potent,
combustible brew of empowerment and control, primarily explains the disruption
of the internet era.
With the coming wave,
forces like these will expand beyond the internet and the digital sphere. Apply
them to any given area of life. Yes, this recipe for wrenching change is one
we’ve seen before. But if the internet seemed big, this is bigger. Massively
omni-use general-purpose technologies will change both society and what it
means to be human. This might sound hyperbolic. But within the next decade, we
must anticipate radical flux, new concentrations, information, wealth, and
power dispersals.
So, where does it
leave technology, and, much more important, where does it leave us? What
happens if the state can no longer control the coming wave in a balanced
fashion?
The already
precarious condition of the modern nation-state and previewed new threats
arriving with the coming wave. This is how a crushing set of stressors and a
colossal redistribution of power will converge to take the one force capable of
managing the wave—the state—to a crisis point.
That moment is almost
here. Brought about by the inexorable rise of technology and the end of
nations, this crisis will take the form of a vast, existential-level bind, a
set of brutal choices and trade-offs representing the most crucial dilemma of
the twenty-first century
Leaving us with no
good options would be technology’s ultimate failure. Yet this is precisely
where we are headed.
For updates click hompage here