Replace "AI" with "Organizations" To Better Consider Our Future Ahead
David Bray, PhD
Principal, CEO, Global Keynoter | Named One of "24 Americans Changing the World" by Business Insider | Leader of Transformative Change in Turbulent Environments Involving Tech, Data, & People
I just had a great conversation with colleague Graham Morehead, who I know from my People-Centered Internet coalition days, and Max Turnquist. The above is a link to a fun AI-and-society discourse where I argue all the "AI hype" is partly because certain organizations - who are gaining power on the global stage while the power of most governments globally in parallel wane - want to distract from their transnational rise to power by presenting an even larger spectacle.
Specifically the distraction of: What if AI did XYZ to humanity...
(Meanwhile, pay no attention to the increasing influence, financial resources, and power of a subset of organizations and what they're able to do to humanity... and in fact are doing).
Please note, I'm not saying there isn't a role for the public or governments to do anything re: AI and organizations. In fact I submit there is a certain "learned helplessness" we need to overcome - in addition to data cooperatives and what does the "right to be left alone" mean relative to organizations and AI.
Moreover, I submit for the most part we're being distracted by this spectacle called super-AI-risks when we really should be focusing on how we learn to co-exist both with super-empowered organizations and individuals who are now (via the increasing accessibility, ubiquity, and affordability of technology) able to do things that only large nation-states could do 40-50 years ago.
领英推荐
What we need to do for the future AI is what we need to do for present, and in fact needed to do a decade or more earlier, for organizations that increasingly influence our lives nationally and globally.
More at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJA8pLbH-Ws + comments welcomed.
Please make sure you don't fall for the distraction trick of getting you to focus on super-AI-risks, while the real important issues to be addressed are behind the curtain today!
In the interim, if you're interested in what the National Academy of Public Administration is doing regarding AI and Public Service, here's a link as well: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/call-action-ai-public-service-national-academy-david-bray-phd
Onwards and upwards together.
Advisor and tech researcher
1 年Totally David Bray, PhD - it’s all hand wavy abstract fear mongering which is why Ive been saying things aren’t going to change that much with AI! . It will only accelerate the current level of extraction of data from peolke. So unless we reenvision how we use AI, all signs point to a future where it’s going to be more or the same but just faster, more complex, & at a greater scale and scope
Author, Futurist, Public Speaker
1 年David Bray argues?that “all the "AI hype" is partly because certain organizations - who are gaining power on the global stage while the power of most governments globally in parallel wane - want to distract from their transnational rise to power by presenting an even larger spectacle.” ???And sure, the worldwide campaign by major players to evade rule-of-law accountability is very real – in effect a slow putsch to stymie transparency and degrade open democracy, re-establishing the far more traditional human governance style of rule-by-privilege… or feudalism. Bray points-out that some portions of this cabal manifest as giga-corporations. But others are more traditionally formatted as families and clans of vast, inherited wealth. Certainly, the lackeys of that resurgent caste include agitprop ?experts who point offstage at distractions, like AI worries, - along with culture wars and other crises – to divert attention from their ongoing coup. (continues)
AI Director, Bloomberg INDG
1 年That's an insightful way of looking at it David Bray, PhD. Another lens on the problem that supports the same idea: AI & ML is just rebranded statistics trying to find meaningful correlations between input and output. "AI Hype" focuses a lot on the idea of magic algorithms that will suddenly solve {thing}, when in most real-word scenarios winning AI requires (1) great data, (2) computational power to think about that data, and (3) an algorithm that defines the logic for that thinking. The former two are, most of the time, overwhelmingly more important and provide huge advantages to large-scale organisations and give them reasons to win in AI** (corollary: robber barons of AI are plausible). If robber barons of AI are plausible, and AI-mediated technology controls a large fraction of future economy growth, then mitigating AI-and-society risks is also an exercise in limiting organisations-and-society risk (and follows your & Max's thoughts in the video). Before superintelligence organisations will make huge gains from mediocre AI. ** To be clear, this skims over a lot of complexity. For example, how SOTA LLM training costs plummeted since Meta released Llama weights to open-source could refute some of my simplified summary.
Author, Futurist, Public Speaker
1 年My new WIRED article (hot today) breaks the three standard 'AI-formats' that can only lead to disaster - slave or blob or 'Skynet' - suggesting instead a 4th, that AI entities can only be held accountable if they have individuality... even 'soul'... https://www.wired.com/story/give-every-ai-a-soul-or-else/
Founder, Chairman, & Principal Analyst of Constellation Research | Co-Host of DisrupTV | Best-Selling Author | Keynote Speaker and Commentator on Disruptive Tech and AI
1 年MyPOV: a must read!