Fundamental Concepts vs. the Operation of Nature

As with Schrödinger’s cat theory in quantum physics when trying to demonstrate the absurdity of super-positioning, where objects may be alive and dead at the same time until observation kicks-in, I am asking myself often whether our existence as a species on the planet is the result of nature’s super-positioning awaiting judgement day. Because, in the absence of validation of our entitlement to exist, we could be both, entitled and forfeited.

And while at the level of the animal kingdom things appear rather simple as the lack of intellect does not require them to undergo any justification for being, when it comes to us humans, it feels as if we are under a constant pressure to prove that we deserve the right to be here. Not least because of our single ability to cause massive damage and wholistic destruction to all other species and the planet as a whole. Here’s where accountability comes into play. Accountability not only towards our next fellow human, but also against all these invisible forces of the universe that coordinate nature’s equilibrium and allow for things to happen. An informal approval state, if you will, that goes unnoticed and converts everything to being deemed as “granted”. And to make things worse, our kind invented around 300 official languages that pose some type of barriers to global communication. And we are working tirelessly to invent and create reasons for separation rather than for unity.

But prove to whom? To ourselves, to our counterparts, to our foes and friends or perhaps to the abstract creator of the world? In complete acknowledgment of our limitation to produce civilization, we have outsourced the task to AI, hoping that this will take mankind one step further in evolution. Come what may. Accepting AI’s superposition as a possible threat or the absolute best until observation will kick-in. If there will be sufficient time for that. And as we know by now, we solve one big problem through the introduction of a bigger one, and hence we gave space to human decline. But no worries, “panem et circenses” is still as popular as ever. The Super Bowl, the Champion’s League, the Grand Slams and the Eurovision are hard currencies to trade with. Shower curtains to cover Gaza, the Ukraine, dictatorships, massive capital corruption and all other atrocities waiting on the flip-side of beauty. But we will survive, right? It worked in the past for us, why not also in the AI era? Or is it perhaps different this time around as we have assigned powers to elements that we don’t fully understand or control?

Because scientists such as Geoffrey Hinton, a Nobel laureate in physics, are already putting the warning signs out there informing that AI may not work like your phone that has an “on” and “off” button, but will develop its own computational intellect and self-awareness over time and in a next step will start writing its own code in order to become entirely independent and uncontrollable by the human element. AI is said to have an iQ of over 170 already and counting by the day. This means AI is already smarter that 99,98% of humans. And as this is the case with most threats, we are either ignorant to their existence or completely uninterested until these threats materialize, at which point we prove ourselves totally unprepared. In a movie script this would be the place where you would find the line “told ya’ so” and this would most definitely be the script of a thriller movie echoing the warnings of the global scientific community. And while most of us may think that this is still light years ahead of us and we will probably no longer be around, the reality looks completely different. We already live in a science fiction inspired reality where R2-D2 and C-3PO are no longer Star Wars robotic characters, but in one shape or the other real robots either delivering KFC food to hotel visitors somewhere in China or Starbuck’s coffee via drones in some street in Shenzhen. Wars are being wedged using unmanned drones and more AI is being employed to make precision strikes to enemy infrastructure. Even if someone looks at war casualties these days, he will quickly notice that there is a shift in deaths from soldiers towards civilians. In other words, intelligence is being employed for the right and for the wrong cause, which makes it really hard to take a stance pro or contra. With a plethora of unanswered questions around the use, the morality and control of AI we embark in a journey into the unknown. But as the river does not flow back neither does AI and evolution, which are one-directional forces by default. In an already troubled and injured planet most of the evil is man-made or attributable to human actions. There is no doubt that we are the enemy No. 1 to ourselves and to the planet. Which brings me back to my original dilemma. Are we still entitled to exist?