As we step into 2025, numerous threats loom over the world. There are wars, threats of wars, disease, famine and starvation, all accentuated by a climate on the brink. We have become inured to some of these threats of course: Wars have been part of the human condition, perhaps even before the beginning of civilization, and it seems unlikely that this is a habit we are about to kick. On top of all this, there is a new threat that casts a shadow over everything, potentially ushering in what might be a new age of anxiety: I am talking here of Artificial Intelligence or AI, an oxymoron almost, full of both promise and contradictions, and perhaps containing the seeds of humanity's destruction.
In the piece that follows, I have tried to analyze how we came to where we now are.
For the blog, I submit three versions, X, Y and Z of what I want to say: one that I wrote myself, and the others, versions of the same piece re-written by publicly available AI editors. Can you spot the difference? Which is the original and which are AI-edited? I am not giving out prizes for the correct answer because there is approximately a 30 percent chance of your being right. So, here goes:
Version X
Our society exhibits concerning trends in political choices and susceptibility to misinformation, as seen in the blind following of ill-advised proposals and individuals seeking validation online. Amidst this, the role of artificial intelligence emerges as a critical question: a rational advisor based on evidence versus fallible human decision-makers like JFK Jr, whose influence may lead us astray. Notably, experts like Geoffrey Hinton caution against unchecked AI power, highlighting potential societal risks. Reflecting on past political decisions, like Trump's re-election bid, prompts consideration of how we arrived at our current state and the dangers of individuals lacking critical thinking skills and being easily swayed. The importance of education, particularly in fostering independent thinking, is underscored, raising questions about the effectiveness of educational standards like Common Core in promoting critical thought. Despite these challenges, there remains a subset of critical thinkers driving advancements in fields like Medicine and Economics, highlighting the contrast between strong intellects and a muddled majority. The looming threat of AI misuse is palpable, especially in the context of leadership surrounded by like-minded individuals, emphasizing the need for vigilance and timely lessons in the years ahead to avert potential calamity.
Tell Fren Tru
Version Y
We humans are actually quite dumb, judging by our political choices, for example. Even though some politicians say dumb things and propose even dumber ones, we still go on and vote for them.
Also, we follow every dumb thing that is proposed by self-appointed experts trolling the dark spaces of the internet to get their fill of “likes” or other signs of approbation (and financial gain, of course). But tell me, what artificial intelligence or AI (by the way, will AI be an entity, a thing or an individual?), after sifting through available evidence and knowledge, will advise you to do something damaging to your physical health, for example? Side by side, who would you rather make medical decisions on your behalf? An AI bot or JFK Jr? Certainly, there are people out there who listen to JFK Jr and are ready to follow him all the way back to the margins of the dark ages. An AI bot, on the other hand, is programmed to gather available evidence from which it presents rational choices. Of course, Geoffrey Hinton, Nobel Laureate and “godfather” of AI expresses reservations on the societal perils and dangers of AI unleashed. He cautions that, unless we take appropriate measures now, AI will come to rule us, and not necessarily for the good either. He should know. He has peered, God-like, into the soul of the thing, and does not like what he sees.
How can we avoid a casual walk or headlong stumble into Hinton's potential doomsday? Whatever means by which we get there, the outcome could be catastrophic.
Perhaps we should first consider where we are coming from. I mean, how did we get to where we are now? Where did it all begin? To answer these questions, we must look to our political choices. Politics again, and probably for always. Had the American electorate not chosen a highly flawed candidate for a second mandate, discussions about potential harm that a JFK Jr, for example, could do, would not be under consideration right now. There are others, like this scion of a famous family, who too, will be in charge of America’s affairs, and whose potential for causing serious injury to America's society and the world's is as great, if not greater than the goings on within the confines of junior’s playpen.
In order to reduce (we can’t eliminate altogether), potential harms, we must first try to understand where the enablers are coming from. I mean, the people who do the voting, who are so easily manipulated. What is their origin and background? And where have they been? What paths have they travelled? Has the white heat of the American melting pot not been intense enough to produce individuals resistant to crazy notions? This writer, at least, finds it all so confusing. Within that fabled American cauldron, everyone is entitled, and legally required, to get 13 years of education: Free of cost to the individual and their family. Thirteen years! One may feel entitled to ask, What do they teach them in all those years?
America’s Common Core State (Education) Standards are designed, supposedly, to prepare students for college and work. (Thirty-eight percent do get a college degree). Really? Do the Common Core Standards include modules through which pupils are trained to think? How do you teach people to think anyway? If there is a method, it has apparently passed the establishment by. Don’t get me wrong: There are many people in America who can think properly and independently and who create and develop new ideas. For example, more than 55% of stars in the Nobel firmament in Medicine or Physiology, in the last decade, have been American born. This is the same in other fields such as Economics as well, also of great societal import. One may well ask, how does this subset of thinkers survive, and flourish, among a mass of muddle-headed citizenry who, incidentally, like the rest of us, are beneficiaries of advances not just in these social and behavioral sciences but also from STEM-driven R&D? The key, therefore, is to craft a way to ensure that if you go to school in America, you will be equipped with the basic thinking skills to make rational decisions.
Meanwhile, does AI pose a danger? You bet it does. If a badly flawed character, in charge of the world, surrounds himself with people like him, the outlook is grim. Hold on to your hats, folks.
Tell Fren Tru
Version Z
We humans often make questionable political choices. Despite some politicians saying and proposing absurd things, we still vote for them.
Additionally, many of us follow dubious advice from so-called experts seeking online approval and financial gain. But consider this: would any AI, after analyzing available evidence, advise you to do something harmful to your physical health? (Mental health is another matter). Who would you trust to make medical decisions on your behalf—an AI bot or JFK Jr.? Some people are willing to follow JFK Jr. back to the dark ages. In contrast, an AI bot is programmed to gather evidence and present rational choices. Geoffrey Hinton, Nobel Laureate and “godfather” of AI, warns us about the societal dangers of AI if we don't take appropriate measures. He has peered into the soul of AI and doesn't like what he sees.
How can we avoid stumbling into Hinton's potential doomsday? To answer this, we must examine our political choices. Had the American electorate not chosen a flawed candidate for a second term, we wouldn't be discussing the potential harm of figures like JFK Jr. Others like him will also be in charge of America's affairs, posing significant risks to society.
To reduce potential harms, we must understand the enablers—those easily manipulated and led astray. What is their origin and background? Has the American melting pot not produced individuals resistant to irrationality? Despite 13 years of free education, many Americans still fall prey to misinformation. America's Common Core State Standards aim to prepare students for college and work, but do they teach critical thinking? Many Americans can think independently and create new ideas, as evidenced by their dominance in Nobel Prizes. How does this subset of thinkers thrive among a mass of muddle-headed citizens?
So, does AI pose a danger? Absolutely. If a flawed character in charge surrounds himself with like-minded individuals, the outlook is grim. Hold on to your hats, folks.
Tell Fren Tru
