Preliminary thoughts about The Fourth Revolution and how Humans probably should deal with the new Technologies already in place and those yet to come

THIS TEXT EXPRESSES MY PERSONAL VIEWS ON THIS TOPIC.

We are currently living what specialists call as the Fourth Revolution. The First Industrial Revolution was The Age of Mechanical Production; the Second Industrial Revolution was The Age of Science and Mass Production and the Third Industrial Revolution has been the Digital Revolution. (This is an useful link to read about the so called “Fourth Revolution”: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/what-is-the-fourth-industrial-revolution)

The Digital Era is here and now and the idea of more “autonomous” societies, and undoubtedly faster, becomes a more feasible reality and less of an idea. The way we live, work and communicate has been completely transformed and this (surreal) pandemic only highlighted that. Yes, it is true that we do not have flying cars yet (as I was expecting by 2015 as a child who grew up in the 80’s) based on the Back to the Future 2 movie; nevertheless we do have: self-driven cars; we have robots; we have “smart buildings” full of micro sensors; Augmented Reality (AR) (see interesting link from Forbes about it: https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/07/30/9-powerful-real-world-applications-of-augmented-reality-ar-today/?sh=68fae4282fe9), we have nanotechnology; genome engineering; astronautics in full force: we have landed on Mars (I wish David Bowie was alive to see that), amongst others, including “Artificial Intelligence”.

In our construction industry, the Modern Methods of Construction (MMC), 3D printing etc. demonstrate how we are indeed living the Fourth Revolution.

In our Fire Safety (Engineering) Industry, we have already started to use digital technologies such as developing apps for carrying our fire safety inspections and fire risk assessments (FRA’s), keeping records of files in line with the Golden Thread for compliance with Regulation 38, development of apps based on Augmented Reality (AR) for firefighting training and means of escape/evacuation training, robots and drones are being used for firefighting … for not saying we have already been using Virtual Reality (VR) through computer models based on CA, Cellular Automata, and CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics to better design buildings.

Source of the image (https://fseg.gre.ac.uk): an example of an Evacuation Simulation in 3D using a computer model based on AC.

Source of the image (https://fseg.gre.ac.uk): an example of a Fire Simulation using a computer model based on CFD.

(The Fourth Revolution is within our Digital Era: the present time we are currently living. I have written an article linking our Digital Era and Fire Safety Engineering, so feel free to read if you are interested. Please see link to the article:

Within this context of the Fourth Revolution, I would like to focus on the Artificial Intelligence (AI) as I have come across to this terminology several times and more often recently. Similarly to AI, I have also come across with other terminologies which mix something inherent from us humans, like intelligence, conscience, emotions, desires, feelings etc (the image below illustrates the amount of "attributes" we have as humans, all processed in our brains). with terminologies which are attributes of machines, computers, robots, systems: objects. It is almost mixing an inorganic element and with an organic element. For instance, I came across with the expression “digital conscience” Within this context, I have seen some reflections on the possibility of AI replicating human thoughts.

Source of this image: The Guardian (link to the article: https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2015/apr/09/will-neuroscientists-ever-be-able-to-read-our-minds)

I am very interested in psychology/philosophy and quantum physics, and as a matter of fact, these are the main topics I read on my “spare time” as they help me to understand “reality” (or whatever reality might be... on a side note, I read this book last year. I do not agree with many of his views, but I like the way he writes, rationally and straight to the point).

I used to do computer programming (on Fortran, C++ and Java) late 90’s and early 2000’s and use multicriteria-decision-making models on that same period, so I am very keen on this type of topics. And I think we attempt to connect, directly and/or indirectly humans with machines, proposing sets of hypotheses, this connection is in somehow related with these topics as well (i.e., psychology, philosophy, quantum physics). Thus, I am taking the liberty to share my thoughts here:

Pragmatically speaking, the terminology Artificial Intelligence (AI), and any variation of it which includes the word intelligence, is fancy, very catchy… and I know it has been probably well-known by now. Nevertheless, I would even question the inclusion of the word of “intelligence” as a word to be linked with computational systems as intelligence is a fundamental attribute which us, human beings, have developed through our evolution path here on Earth. Computational (digital) systems (i.e., computer models, software are based on algorithms) are not intelligent per se; their sophistication and high reliability in providing an estimated outcome only highlight how intelligent their developer (or team of developers) is. Within this context, I would recommend an investigation/research and subsequent reflection on the concepts of Models and Reality. (I have written years ago about it focused on Evacuation and Fire models for simulating people movement and fire/smoke behave respectively, see link in case you might want to read this paper: https://www.academia.edu/5758459/Evacuation_Processes_Versus_Evacuation_Models_Quo_Vadimus_).

As the terminology became established, I guess it is pretty difficult to change things. It is probably already in the collective unconscious. (It is similar to the “panic-bar” terminology (it is also known as “panic” exit device, “panic” bar, or eventually push bar or crash bar); scientifically speaking, it is not correct to call this bar as “panic” bar as people when are using this bar to escape are not reacting under a panic attack. If you are interested in Human Behaviour in (Fire) Emergency situations and related topics, I would recommend to visit the website of the research group Fire Safety Engineering Group (see their link below) as they have been researching these topics and have made available scientific papers, clarifying in depth this terminology). But I believe, even though we continue using the word “Intelligence” associated with machines (i.e., computers), we should be clear that they, the machines, robots, computers, models etc. do not have intelligence. It is almost confusing the creation with the creator. (For some reason, it reminded me the history of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, not sure why).

Regarding the terminology “Digital Conscience”, I think the same rationale I used for intelligence applies here. Conscience is another fundamental attribute of human beings which we develop through reason/intelligence. Once humans started to minimise their actions/behaviour solely based on instincts and maximise those based on intelligence, we start to develop our consciousness and awareness of “reality” (this is pretty into metaphysics and I will not deviate the topic, although very tempting).

The Cambridge Dictionary defines conscience as:

“the feeling that you know and should do what is right and should avoid doing what is wrong, and that makes you feel guilty when you have done something you know is wrong”

 The Cambridge Dictionary also defines conscience as:

 “the part of you that judges how moral your own actions are and makes you feel guilty about bad things that you have done or things you feel responsible for"

Conscience can be summarised as an individual’s moral sense of right and wrong and it will lead to our personal guidance’s behaviour. Furthermore, indeed, conscience is related with the awareness of reality and what wrong and right are (i.e., the concepts of amorality, morality, and immorality come from this distinguish).

Based on the concepts of Intelligence and Conscience alone, I would reflect on those proposed “hypotheses” and confidently say that no, Artificial Intelligence cannot create a digital conscience and consequently cannot replicate (therefore, replace) human thoughts as:

 -       a) digital systems do not have conscience and;

 -       b) human thoughts are so complex that we probably do need to understand them via quantum physics as well as their speed are higher than the speed of light (so they do not obey Newton Laws) and digital systems (which are the basis of any computer model, such as AI) are binary (i.e., linear). Although digital systems (i.e., software = models = “AI”) can make some decisions, they are far from being able to process complex decisions that we, humans, can make in micro-seconds with our “simple” thoughts. In summary, our brains are the most sophisticated “systems” still… paraphrasing a genius, René Descartes: “we think, therefore, we exist”. (I wrote, in Portuguese, how the Descartes' method, i.e., Cartesian doubt, can/should be thought more emphatically in our (Fire Safety) Engineering courses, please see link to the article: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/breve-resenha-sobre-o-pensamento-cartesiano-e-de-rodrigo-machado/?trackingId=D5WQxsGGRdeIdUXjjv%2FeGA%3D%3D)

This is a very interesting topic and it would probably need further discussions, and these would certainly need the inclusion of experts, such as psychologists and medical doctors specialised in neurology and psychiatry. Furthermore, I will not discuss much further on these as I would probably become prolix and get trapped in a sophism.

But having said that, yes, in a very POSITIVE note on AI, within this Digital Era we are living, is amazing and so many things we have already achieved (as mentioned in the beginning of this article) and will achieve is exciting. Our work methods/approaches and new businesses will certainly keep evolving and again, this is exciting. We only need to keep up with the constant changes. However, I would also make an important remark: these changes cannot neglect us: the people. Humans need to benefit from technology. (It is similar to make a building “sustainable” (i.e., ticking the box of a simplistic-binary-linear, non-holistic checklist of any specific certificate) and then including combustible materials in core-areas of the building and core-construction elements of the building, compromising life safety of its occupants and visitors. Is a building which compromises the life safety of the end user sustainable? I would categorically say No. The concept of sustainability and how we approach it probably needs to be re-assessed and redefined. Please see link for a further discussion on this topic of this might be of your interest:   

 If we do not put people first, we are potentially taking the dangerous risks of creating a “technocracy”, where people can become “disposable*”. Another genius, Charles Chaplin raised this concern in one of his masterpiece of 1936, “Modern Times”, where he pointed out the challenges people had to survive in the new modern fast growing industrialised world (the Second Industrial Revolution, where the “Age of Science” & Mass Production post-industrial revolution occurred). (I have all his movies; his work legacy for cinema is like the work legacy The Beatles gave to rock-pop industry. Geniuses on their own right). *I recommend the book from Kevin Bales (Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy Paperback – 8 Aug. 2000).

(The funny factory scene from the Modern Times. It is a classic scene from a classic movie. It still so powerful; raises the awareness of importance of well-being/wellness and health and safety... and the concept of "Modern Times" will always be present and relative. #Reflection)

I think, in summary, my “preliminary thoughts about The Fourth Revolution and how Humans probably should deal with the new Technologies already in place and those yet to come” are very simple:

1)   We should/must embrace technology and take advantage of all the positive outcomes we can get from it to our societies, putting people first always, not neglecting people, particularly those in need;

 2)   We cannot replace people by machines, why? Because the creations are not creators, as simple as that. In that sense, we can continue misuse some terminologies as they are “catchy” like a science-fiction/futuristic jargon's, but we should probably be aware of (i) they are wrong and (ii) not idolise too much a future led by robots (it is a nice theme for movies, Robocop and many others, new ones, are here to entertain us);

 3)   Those who are stronger, in every sense, should assist those in need, because without equity, there will be no further progress on Earth. There will be a limit to where we can go. And this has nothing to do with any specific political agenda per se (i.e., right or left, capitalism, communism/socialism, liberalism etc.), but just a factual observation.

 As always, please feel free to get in touch if you feel like exchanging ideas on this topic and/or any related ones within this article.

 Keep safe, Rodrigo