THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Disclosure: Except for Microsoft spellcheck, the following commentary was written with 100% human input

It is difficult to keep up with the news concerning the warp-speed rollout of machine-generated artificial intelligence (AI). This new technology refers to the simulation of human intelligence by machines that are programmed to think like humans.  By the time this commentary is published, my impressions will probably be as stale as last week’s bread.

In early March, technology stocks involved in new AI research caught the eye of investors and underwent a significant rally. This was followed by one headline report after another proclaiming AI either as a miracle discovery that will advance human thought or as the advent of a dark dystopian future. 

Recently, one of the newest machine-learning “Chabot” programs was asked to explain how humankind could safely utilize AI. The program responded: “It is not necessarily desirable or ethical to slow down the progress of AI as a field, as it has the potential to bring about many positive advancements for society.” This upbeat, machine-generated answer did little to calm the detractors of AI. The response sounds like the prologue of a science fiction movie where events could go terribly wrong.

Inside the insular world of AI experts, one group, which includes Elon Musk, is certain that unmanaged AI could kill us all.  These individuals are calling for a six-month pause on creating new machine-learning projects. The fear is that without proper controls on research, AI may soon begin to disobey its programmer’s instructions and operate independently with malicious intent.

On the other hand, many investors look forward to AI’s unimpeded introduction as they try to stay ahead of the competition. They argue that the upside is greater than any potential threat. Indeed, there are immediate applications in medicine for precise diagnoses and surgical procedures, AI-generated research and writing, and advanced learning methods in education. Many other fields will be enhanced by machine-generated accumulated knowledge.

For unschooled observers like me, it was difficult to understand how the smartest thinkers in the world could take such opposing positions. The answer, I learned, is that no one knows how AI works. The complexity of AI models has been doubling every few months. Remarkably, the process by which learning machines store, distill and retrieve knowledge is unknown. This element of mystery is exciting for some insiders and a troubling risk for others.

In my lifetime, similar questions of technology outdistancing human capacity to absorb it have happened on at least two occasions. In the 1950s, the issue was nuclear energy. There were efforts to pause and draw ethical boundaries to prevent nuclear war while expanding positive applications of nuclear power.

The second more recent catastrophic risk was gene splicing/genetic engineering. Again, the international community got together and developed guidelines to permit positive applications while attempting to prohibit the bioengineering of dangerous pathogens. The unknown origins of COVID-19 question whether these efforts were successful.

Apart from whether AI will be our salvation or our destruction is the more benign inquiry of how AI will alter human learning. Philosophers and social scientists have weighed in on this topic. Historians point out that with the discovery of the printing press, curious thinkers throughout the known world could finally communicate discoveries and replicate findings. They turned hypotheses into facts through the scientific method. The Age of Enlightenment challenged the medieval interpretation of a world based on religious faith and gave us knowledge that was built on proven facts.

With AI, the process works in reverse. The most sophisticated AI models cost more than $1 billion each to become productive, utilizing thousands of computers.  Instead of scientific certainties, we end up with new knowledge with no discernable foundation. AI advances human insight without providing us with any understanding of how the knowledge was uncovered. Advocates for pushing AI forward argue that this lack of comprehension is not a deal breaker because new discoveries generated by AI will improve society when coupled with human reason.

In addition to the dystopian concern that scientists could lose control, another negative factor has surfaced. ChatGPT, a form of generative AI, is the most common type of machine learning in general circulation. It is a tool that lets users enter prompts to search much of the world’s internet data. ChatGPT provides detailed answers to these inquiries.

Unfortunately, the technology occasionally makes up facts that sound real to provide a very believable response.  Moreover, malicious actors are well-versed in injecting false information into the internet making it difficult for AI to discern fact from fiction. To address these problems researchers are already working on a model capable of questioning the veracity of a ChatGPT answer.

The “high priests” of technological progress have mixed feelings about the effects of AI on society. It is important for concerned citizens and elected officials to ask the difficult questions involving the deployment of AI. Leaving the future of AI to the scientific community and to venture capitalists out to make a fortune, with no respect for controls, would be a dangerous miscalculation.

One reasonable solution would be to continue research in AI while withholding rollouts to the public until more is understood about how AI works and processes data. The world may be dysfunctional but we must not make the mistake of surrendering our future to thinking machines in an effort to improve society.