Tag Archives: humanity

Humankind’s End – Pet, Child, or Colleague? 

1 Reply

Part 1: Frog in the Pot

There is the story of the frog in the pot of boiling water which goes like this: Toss a frog into a boiling pot of water and it will instantly hop out, recognizing the danger of the hot water. However, put a frog in a cold pot of water, very slowly bring it to a boil, and the frog will swim around oblivious to the gradual change in temperature and it will swim until it boils to death. I’ve heard conflicting evidence that questions if this will actually happen, but I think this story is relevant to what we are seeing with AI – Artificial Intelligence – today. 

The reality is that AI is getting smarter and smarter. While there is debate as to when we will have AGI – Artificial General Intelligence or ASI – Artificial Super Intelligence, like the pot set to slowly boil, this time is coming, even if the timeline is unknown. 

What does this mean for us? Well, I would be hard pressed to tell you exactly when this happened, but at some point in the past people stopped doing complicated math calculations by hand and eventually relied more and more on calculators and computers. I could solve a problem like 12,458 divided by 27 to 5 decimal places by doing long division, but why would I? I can use a calculator. I’d know the answer would be accurate, and I’d get that answer much faster than doing the math myself. 

What happens when we get to the point when we have ASI, and all the answers to (almost) all the questions we can ask, can be answered faster and better by the super intelligent AI? Would we want to govern ourselves when the AI can do a better job? Would we want to trust a potentially crooked politician to make expensive economic decisions or would be pick the ASI? Would we want to trust a fallible doctor for a medical diagnosis or would we rather the doctor confer with a super intelligence that has access to every possible diagnosis, and which has looked at many million more scans than the doctor ever did, before making the diagnosis? 

We are approaching the ‘water boiling point’ where we are going to have Artificial Intelligence making most key decisions for us because we would be dumb to try to make those decisions ourselves when we know the ASI can do it so much better than we ever could. 

Part 2: Pet, Child, or Colleague? 

So, assuming that we are going to reach a metaphorical boiling point where we decide to let ASI make many if not most key decisions in our lives, what does the mean for humanity? I think there are one of three inevitable outcomes: We will either become AI’s pet, child, or colleague.

Here are the scenarios as I see them playing out:

Pet: We might think our dogs are pretty smart, but don’t want our dog to make decisions for us. A super intelligent AI may see us as only slightly more intelligent animals, who perhaps should be kept around. However, the super intelligence might not want to align with a warring, superstitious, short lived being who seems to have problems getting along as a species… a species who builds arbitrary borders and exclude each other rather than attempt to get along in any meaningful way. Why wouldn’t an ASI treat us more like pets than as equals? 

Child: We know children will make mistakes and bad decisions, that’s part of growing up. That’s why we have age limits for things like driving and drinking. Maybe an ASI will look at us like children who don’t fully understand how things work, and it will take care of us and manage us like children, taking our wishes into consideration, but not letting us make any crucial decisions on our own… of course it will do this ‘for our own good’… but ultimately treat us like immature children, never really ready to accept full responsibility for ourselves. 

Colleague: This might play out where we maintain our true humanity, but I don’t see it that way. Sure a super intelligent AI might look to collaborate and make our lives better while governing us, while also giving us a voice and some choice about how we are governed. But I envision a different kind of colleague experience. I envision an integration of humans and ASI to create a  cyborg – a being that features both organic and biomechatronic body parts… Essentially connecting our human form with AI integrated assistive parts. Why put up with a slow human with poor sensor capabilities when enhancements will make them much easier to work with? 

Part 3: Inevitability 

While I suspect that most of us would want the outcome to be Colleague, rather than Child or Pet, I don’t believe this is our decision.

We can try to design ASI such that it sees value in working with us, but when our intelligence compared to a super intelligent AI is the equivalent to how we look at chimps, dolphins, or Octopus, we really have to consider why they would want to integrate our intelligence with theirs? While we might look at a chimpanzee and think, “Oh how cute, that one can do sign language, and knows 350 signs,” we don’t also think, “Lets create a relations with that chimp in a way that we share intelligence with them and let them make decisions with or for us. And in the same vein, ASI is unlikely to look at a very bright human and think, “Oh how cute, that human can do abstract calculus or astrophysics in his head… let’s integrate ourselves with this simple creature.” 

Ultimately, an Artificial Super Intelligence is going to make the decision. Maybe there is something unique about the human brain or the human condition that would make an ASI want to integrate with us, but we can’t pretend to know if this would be of interest to the super intelligence or not. We can only hope that’s the case. The reality is that the metaphorical water is boiling, we don’t really know when it’s going to boil, and when it does the fate of humankind will not be up to us.

Dystopian hiring

Leave a reply

We aren’t that far away from a rather dystopian world where so much of our lives are monitored and recorded that we will be an open book.

Imagine going for a job interview and before you arrive a digital, AI private detective has tracked every possible video, image, and written document that you’ve shared publicly, and given you a score based on company criteria that you are not privy to. And maybe that tracking will go beyond publicly shared data and reveal even more about you, like medical information scraped from a data breach you know nothing about.

Imagine going into that interviews where you are submitted to a ‘voluntary’ brain scan as part of the interview… that you agree to knowing full well that you won’t get the job if you don’t volunteer.

That scan will check to see if you are being honest during the interview, and it will also do things like measure the size of your anterior medsingulate cortex, which will let the company know if you are someone who does or does not challenge themselves. The company hiring you will know more about you than your friends and family do.

And for a real dystopian plot twist: it’s an android interviewing you for a mundane job that androids consider too menial to do! Even without this twist, I wonder what the job market will look like in 20 years? What role will humans play in the overall work force? What jobs are uniquely human, and what jobs can a brilliant if not super intelligent AI do?

I’m not sure how much the job market will truly change in just 20 years, but at the rate of advancement that I’m seeing in robotics and artificial intelligence, I really think a major disruption in what we call work is coming. The disruption will be uneven at first, taking more jobs in different sectors than in others, but sooner than we would want to envision, the disruption is coming in almost every sector. What will that really mean for humans and the things we define as work?

Progress and stagnation

Leave a reply

The invention of wheels made the movement of objects and ourselves so much easier. And they also assisted us in moving tools of war.

Machinery of mass production made life easier. And we also produce an over abundance of weapons that we use on both foreign and domestic lands.

The scientific method has led to innovations in fields like medicine. And we also make tools of mass destruction, with the soul purpose of maiming and killing each other.

We are innovative, technological, and creatively brilliant. And yet we are divided and we concoct global issues created by old religions, tribal lines, and broken ideologies.

Humanity chooses to be inhumane, and to develop propaganda to justify our actions. We do it for country, for money, for power, and for ideologies be they economic, political, or theological.

We have innovated. We have modernized. We have claimed to be civilized… but in the matters of being human we have stagnated. We have not evolved, we have merely advanced and innovated ways of perpetuating our barbaric tendencies.

Technology progresses. Humanity stagnates. History repeats.

Self-interests in AI

Yesterday I read the following in the ‘Superhuman Newsletter (5/26/25)’:

Bad Robot: A new study from Palisade Research claims that “OpenAI’s o3 model sabotaged a shutdown mechanism to prevent itself from being turned off”, even when it was explicitly instructed to shut down. The study raises serious safety concerns.

It amazes me how we’ve gotten here. Ten, or even five years ago there were all kinds of discussions about of AI safety. There was a belief that future AI would be built in isolation with an ‘air-gap’, used as a security measure to ensure AI systems remained contained and separate from other networks or systems. We would grow this intelligence in a metaphorical petri dish and build safety guards around it before we let it out into the wild

Instead, these systems have been built fully in the wild. They have been give unlimited data and information, and we’ve built them in a way that we aren’t sure we understand their ‘thinking’. They surprise us with choices like choosing not to turn off when explicitly asked to. Meanwhile we are simultaneously training them to use ‘agents’ that interact with the real world.

What we are essentially doing is building a super intelligence that can act autonomously, while simultaneously building robots that are faster, stronger, more agile, and fully programmable by us… or by an AI. Let’s just pause for a moment and think about these two technologies working together. It’s hard not to construct a dystopian vision of the future when we watch these technologies collide.

And the reality is that we have not built an air-gap. We don’t have a kill switch. We are essentially heading down a path to having super-intelligent AI ignoring our commands while operating robots and machines that will make us feeble in comparison (in intelligence, strength, and mobility).

When our intelligence compared to AI is equivalent to a chimpanzee’s intelligence compared to ours, how will this super-intelligence treat us? This is not a hyperbole, it’s a real question we should be thinking about. If today’s rather simplistic LLM AI models are already choosing to ignore our commands what makes us think a super-intelligent AI will listen to or reason with us?

All is well and good when our interests align, but I don’t see any evidence that self-interested AI will necessarily have aligned interests with the intelligent monkeys that we are. And the fact that we’re building this super-intelligence out in the wild gives reason to pause and wonder what will become of humanity in an age of super-intelligent AI?

Civilization and Evolution

Evolution is a slow process. Small changes over thousand and millions of years. I’m not thinking about bacteria becoming antibiotic resistant or moths changing colour over time to match their environment. I’m thinking about modern humans (Homo sapiens) who emerged approximately 300,000 years ago. Sure, certain traits like lactose tolerance evolved approximately 5,000–10,000 years in some populations, but for the most part we are a heck of a lot like our ancestors 100,000 years ago. Taller due to better nutrition, but otherwise pretty much the same.

And when we think about civilization as we know it, we are really talking about the last 2,500-3,000 years… and yet we are the same humans who lived as nomads and hunter-gatherers for tens of thousands of years before that. In other words we have not evolved to live in the societies we currently live in.

We didn’t evolve to live mostly indoors, away from nature, and out of sunlight for most of our day. We didn’t evolve to use artificial light at night before going to bed at hours well past dark. We don’t evolve to do shift work, or to sit at a desk all day.

We didn’t evolve to work for made up currencies so that we could go to buildings where we buy food that is over-processed, over-sweetened, and filled with empty calories. We didn’t evolve to spend time in front of screens that distract and overstimulate us.

We are simple but very intelligent animals who have not evolved much at all since we lived in small communities where we knew everyone, and knew what to fear, and how to protect ourselves from dangers.

Yet we now live surrounded by people we don’t know, and we are triggered by stresses that we evolutionarily were not designed for. Everything from being in constant debt, to working in stressful environments, to information overload, to time pressures, social comparison, choice overload, conflicting ideologies, environmental noises and hazards, and social disconnection.

We live in a state of overstimulation, stress, and distraction that we have not evolved to cope with. Then we identify diagnoses to tell us how we are broken, how we don’t fit in, and why we struggle. Maybe it’s the societies we have built that are broken? Maybe we evolutionarily do not belong in the social, technological, and societal structures we’ve created?

Maybe, just maybe, we are trying to live our best lives in an environment we were not designed for. Our modern civilizations are not well equipped to meet the needs of our primitive evolution… We have built ‘advanced’ cages and put ourselves in zoos that are nothing like the environment we are supposed to live in. And we don’t realize that all the things we think are broken about us are actually things that are broken about this fake environment we’ve trapped ourselves in.

And so we spend hours exercising, moving around weights that don’t need to be moved, meditating to empty our minds and seek presence and peace. We spend hours playing or cheering on sports teams so that we can have camaraderie with a small community. We spend thousands of dollars on camping equipment so that we can commune with nature. And some people take drugs or alcohol to escape the zoos and cages that we feel trapped in.

Maybe we’ve built our civilizations in ways that have not meaningfully considered our evolutionary needs.

How gullible are we?

“… it is entirely possible that future generations will look back, from the vantage point of a more sophisticated theory, and wonder how we could have been so gullible.”

— Closing sentence of Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J. Griffiths.

I came across this quote today and it made me wonder just how gullible we are as a species? Not just because we don’t understand quantum mechanics, not just because we don’t understand the gap between Newtonian Physics and Special Relativity, but for so many more simple and less profound reasons.

We fight over imaginary lines we call borders. We spend a considerable amount of our existence working for money… pieces of paper that only have value because we believe it has value, while our governments (we also make up silly rules for) print that money in mass volumes to keep our economies afloat.

We break into tribes based on heritage, relative strength, socioeconomics, and even skin colour. And we spend a tremendous amount of the global economy to create weapons to protect ourselves and also threaten ‘those who are not like us’.

We fight over false Gods. Why do I say false Gods? Because there are literally thousands of them, and even the largest, Christianity, doesn’t agree with who gets into heaven. So the vast majority of believers are believers in the wrong religion or wrong sect. Yet hate, discrimination, and wars are all byproducts of people of faith fighting people of different faiths, very often ‘in the name of their God’.

Human beings are playing the game of life with imaginary boundaries, imaginary political structures, imaginary currencies, and imaginary Gods. We are gullible. We are blinded by unimportant things, and in 100 years humankind will look upon us like we were as backwards as we perceive cultures and societies that did barbaric and stupid things 100’s of years ago.

Morality and Accountability

I saw this question and response on BlueSky Social and it got me thinking:

Why are ethics questions always like:

“is it ethical to steal bread to feed your starving family?”

And not:

“is it ethical to hoard bread when families are starving?”

Existential Comics @existentialcoms

___

Because the first question shifts the blame to the desperate, making their morality the focus, while the second question demands accountability from the powerful. It’s easier to question survival than to challenge greed.

Debayor @debayoorr.bsky.social

___

That last sentence really struck a chord in me, “It’s easier to question survival than to challenge greed.”

We separate morality from accountability in ways that don’t really make sense. To me it’s the difference between a socialist and a capitalist democracy. A socialist democracy infuses accountability with morality, while a capitalist democracy separates the two.

Another way to look at this is with a quote from the comic book Spider-Man: “With great power comes great responsibility.” A socialist democracy takes the quote literally. A capitalist democracy redirects the focus: “Holding great power becomes my responsibility.”

Accountability to others versus accountability to power and self. Morality takes a back seat to greater control, and greater success. And that is who we idolize… the rich and famous. The ones with power and influence. Morality doesn’t come into play. Accountability doesn’t come into play.

If you came from another planet and witnessed the accumulation of wealth that happens at the expense of so many who lack wealth, what would you think of the morality of humans? Who would you admire more, the mother or father stealing a loaf of bread to feed their family, or the limo-driven CEO’s who earn 1,000% or more income than the thousands of employees under them?

____

Intersections revisited

There are some things I write here on Daily-Ink, and when I read my own writing a month or two later I barely remember or even recognize my own writing. I wrote that?

But there are other things I write and I remember. There is one post in particular that I think about regularly. Tonight on (another) walk with my wife we reached an intersection where we were crossing the road. Perpendicular to us, on the cross street’s sidewalk, were two men who reached the intersection exactly the same time as us. We all slowed down to let each other pass. They were the only other people walking anywhere near us and sure enough we intersected at the one place our paths crossed.

Despite thinking about the following post regularly, I hadn’t actually re-read it in a couple years. I didn’t consciously remember that it also started with a walk with my wife, but what I do remember, what I reflect on when it regularly happens, is that we are somehow drawn to these intersections.

~ ~ ~

October 27, 2021

Human intersections

Last night I went for a walk with my wife. Minutes from home we were walking on a quiet, empty street that doesn’t have sidewalks. Then a car approached from in front of us. We started to move to the side of the road, and noticed car lights coming from behind us as well. The cars crossed paths right where we were on the edge of the road, having had to slow down to cautiously make space for us and the other car. Then we continued our walk with no cars approaching us from either way until we arrived home.

I find it fascinating how we seem to be drawn, pulled to intersecting points with other people. For the amount of times someone walks by our house, or the front of my school when I arrive before any students, I’m amazed how often I have to wait for a pedestrian to walk cross the driveway before I can make the turn… amazed that as I wait, I can see no other pedestrians for an entire block.

In a car you are turning left and must wait for the one car coming the other way to pass.

At a shopping plaza you go to open a door to a store and the one other person in sight is coming through the door the other way.

On a path in a park, you are walking faster than the people in front of you, and as you go to pass them, other people are approaching from the other way crowding the path at your takeover point.

I think we find ourselves at these intersections at a rate that is greater than probability would suggest… The likelihood of such intersections happen far more than just by chance. Like magnets passing one another, there is a pull towards others, an unseen force that draws us into each other’s path. It isn’t a case of bad timing, it’s not that we are unlucky and forced to slow down, wait, or squeeze by someone else. It’s actually just the opposite. We naturally seek each other out on some unconscious level. We are drawn to human intersections.

Our significance

Brian Cox is a brilliant scientist. I love this quote:

“There is only one interesting question in philosophy: What does it mean to live a finite, fragile life in an infinite eternal universe?“

@evancarmichael

The most interesting question in philosophy #briancox #philosophy #space #physics #existence #astronomy #foodforthought

♬ Experience (Cover Ludovico Einaudi) – 北昼

On the grand scale of the universe our planet is insignificant. But being the only species on the only planet that can grasp what the universe is… for millions of light years in any direction… makes us perhaps the most significant thing in our part of the universe.

Is something beautiful if no conscious being is around to observe it? Does anything matter if there is no appreciation of significance? Does the universe beyond this third closest rock from our sun understand laughter, love, or happiness? Beyond the life on earth, where is there any meaning? Where is there any significance to the existence of the universe?

I’m sure in a universe with trillions stars there is, has been, and will be other intelligent life ‘out there’. But we are very likely the most intelligent form of life circling around one of the 400 billion stars in our galaxy.

We create the meaning for our galaxy and for the entire universe. We embody an understanding and appreciation for life, time, and existence. It’s compelling to think that our existence on an insignificant planet in an insignificant galaxy in an insignificant part of the universe might be the most significant existence in that same universe.

“What does it mean to live a finite, fragile life in an infinite eternal universe?“

It means whatever meaning we give it… it’s as significant as we make it. Let’s appreciate that and not take it for granted. Life is beautiful, special, and so fleeting that every moment should be sacred.

AI, Content and Context

I found this quote very interesting. On his podcast, Diary of a CEO, Steven Bartlett is talking to Daniel Priestley and Steven mentions that Open AI’s Sam Altman believes we are not far away from a 1 person company making a billion dollars, using AI rather than other employees. Daniel pushes back and says while that might happen, a more likely and more repeatable scenario would be a 5 person team. Then he says this:

“AI is very good at content but not context. And having 5 people who share a context and create a context, together… then the content can happen using AI. AI without that context, it doesn’t know what to do, so it doesn’t have any purpose.”

Daniel Priestley

Like I shared before, “The true power and potential of AI isn’t what AI can do on its own, it’s what humans and AI can do together.”

This idea of context versus content seems to be the ingredients that make this marriage so ideal. This is noticeable when generating AI images, as I’ve done for quite some time, creating images to go with this blog. For example, I’ll describe something like a guy on a treadmill and maybe one of the four images created would have the guy backwards on the treadmill – content correct, but not context. As well, AI is really unaware of its’ own biases that humans can more easily see. These context errors are common.

But just as AI will be better teaming with humans, humans are also better when they team with other humans, rather than being solo. We miss context too, we struggle to see our own biases, unless we have people around us to both share and create the context.

The best innovations of the future are going to come from small teams of people providing rich contexts for AI. And while AI will get better at both context and content, it’s going to be a while before AI can do both of these really well. It’s what AI and humans can do together that will be really exciting to see.