The last few months have proven that we are not as far off Singularity as I thought. Only three months ago, I realized what OpenAI actually does and how far the development has come, completely under my radar. Only three months ago, I protested if someone even used the term AI, and I saw it as more of a vision and driving force, a concept, rather than something real. Since then, in addition to my regular work, I have spent over 300 hours exploring the potential of OpenAI, held inspirational lectures for developers and POs, developed business cases, and created my own apps with integration to their APIs.

With ChatGPT in one window, Visual Studio Code in another, hooked up to OpenAI’s APIs, a Vector Database, and then adding some imagination, the capabilities bring back flashes from the movie Limitless. Even though nothing gets me more excited than this fact, I fully understand the reasonable and oh-so-important fear of what’s going on.

The last week, we’ve seen an open letter from Elon Musk and the Pope, amongst others. I am truly happy that they raise the issues at hand and the very real risks that we now stand before. At the same time, those two names might not be what inspires the most confidence when it comes to the question. Elon Musk started AI and got pissed off when he couldn’t be the Chief AI. He jumped ship and didn’t want to play with the other kids unless he would be in the center of attention. Later when ChatGPT has popularized and revolutionized the way we see AI, he is the MO in FOMO. First, he starts recruiting and saying that he’s gonna create an anti-woke AI who will most certainly free us from the chains of progression so we can stay in our conservative capsule. All still good in my opinion, which is all this is. I expect there to be AIs of every shape and color seeing the light of the day. Variation is the name of the game, as evolution has shown us by now. Fast forward to late March, probably after realizing the complexity of the issue, suddenly he makes a pact with the church and goes out calling for a PROHIBITION OF RESEARCH. Musk was just about to re-enter the race; now he calls for a halt in the race? In Swedish, we call it Kappvändare.

Right beside love and experience, I would say that innovation is one of the fundamental aspects of human nature, and the quest for knowledge has driven much of our history. By prohibiting research in any field, we limit our potential for growth, discovery, and improvement. The concerns raised by those calling for a halt to AI research are valid and must be taken seriously. However, the answer lies not in prohibition but in responsible, ethical research and development. Collaboration between researchers, governments, and the public is essential to create robust regulatory frameworks and guidelines for the use and deployment of AI.

To be frank, we are not currently as a species threatened; we can still unplug the computer (Bring back the iMac with the handle to be able to throw it out the window!).

At the same time, we are threatened as a society. The next 5 years will be incredibly rough for both a lot of individuals and for us as a society. We are looking at mass unemployment, rapid technical revolution, and financial redistribution amongst companies. We need to address matters of integrity, authenticity, not to mention validation of information and identities. For me, one of the most prominent issues is that we will see a rapid increase of wealth gaps, and by proxy of power gaps. Tech companies will be more and more efficient while being less and less reliant on their workforce. When I do my job 10x faster, I do not get 10x as much pay; rather, the company gets 10x more for the same price. This means that the profits that would have been shared amongst the employees will stay in the corporation piggy banks. And 10x is nothing; we are already further than that technically with GPT-4. It’s just a question about how we use it and leverage it.

Unfortunately, the relatively slow turning cogs of our democratic systems make it rather hard to do things in the way that we are used to if we are to get in control of the situation. I believe that a regulated rollout where we limit availability is a very reasonable way to mitigate the fast-paced changes and ensure that our current society does not get overturned too quickly, creating political and social issues. This also allows us to let the research continue. Nobody really thinks that every (any?) prominent or aspiring country would suddenly stop innovating and researching the most powerful technology on earth just because someone says it’s dangerous. China? Russia?

Maybe we’ll be praying for Sarah Connor in a few years. But until that point, we still live in a geopolitical reality that we call democracy in the midst of the current world order.

I’ll finish off with this quote from the godfather himself and his essay “My Own View” in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction (1978):

“It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be…

This, in turn, means that our statesmen, our businessmen, our everyman must take on a science fictional way of thinking.” -Isaac Asimov