Good point. I wrote this essay originally in March of 2023, and at that time, things were accelerating/ exploding at such a rate that it was baffling to try to extrapolate what the capabilities of AI could be in another 6-12 months.
There are still examples of GPT and other AI doing brilliant things. Can you share what you used to prompt it?
While it is encouraging to see that since March, some of the hype has cooled, and regulators have stepped in, I think the essential point of the essay remains valid— we are reckoning with a type of intelligence that we don’t understand. Thus, caution is advised. Do you agree with that?
Sep 1, 2023·edited Sep 1, 2023Liked by Grant Shillings
Yes, human beings have filled the Earth and have dominion over it. However, I don't believe the point about devices such as smartphones and social media cleanly connects to those things now having dominion over us. For example, Facebook is a service that many people spend an average of 2 hours per day scrolling through. I would argue that it's not the technology itself but the people behind the technology who are dominating other human beings. This has always existed throughout history and across cultures. Take India's fragmented social class system as an example—very few 'haves' controlling many 'have nots.'
The link I believe you're searching for is that humans need something to worship. In the past, it was their predators; then it shifted to gods, and later to a singular God. We formed countries, and people began worshipping their leaders. As cultural progress continued, more factions of people worshipped their crafts—artwork, woodworking, metallurgy, and so on. Now, I think people are trying to use their devices as a replacement for lost community and are mistakenly worshipping those. The gravity of the situation becomes apparent when people start worshipping AI.
Right now, it feels challenging to worship something as clunky as ChatGPT, but give it a few years, and people will find a way to want to elect it as president.
So, I believe you're partially right that AI will get closer and closer to dominating humans, but the only way I see this happening is through humans starting to worship and put its needs above their own. We still definitely have a few hype cycles left before that starts happening.
Good point about humans leveraging the technology, rather than the technology itself. Still, I think it's ominous to consider the fact that machines might be using us, just like memes might be. I think some plants and bacteria also use us to proliferate, whether we realize it or not.
People aren't currently worshiping specific AI installations like ChatGPT, but there are certainly transhumanists out there that are gladly willing to hand over control of the earth to AI as the dominant species. I've read and talked to several of them.
In fact, the main purpose. of my essay is to generate concern so that we can be more conservative around AI development. Too many people are happily proceeding down the path without due regard, and I think the cycles we have left are a lot fewer than we think, or would like to believe.
Listen, we as a species have not really done a stellar job. We are shitting in our nest, destroying the ecosystem of the planet and a great majority of our species is not happy, living in fear of hunger, disease, suffering or violent death. i fail to see how AI can do worse. So what if it causes the extinction of our species; it is our direct offspring. Are there any Neanderthals around moaning about how modern homo wiped them out? All will be forgotten. Maybe our offspring will have memorials to us lol.
Interesting point. I think it all depends on perspective. If you compare our current state with that of most people 100, 1000 years ago, we’re doing much better. Hunger, disease, and suffering are a feature of life, and will always be with us. It happens to every animal and plant population too.
As for my part, I’d rather have life, with all its suffering and also all the good moments, rather than oblivion. It sounds like you’re proposing suicide as a species is better than life? Or am I misunderstanding your argument?
Yup, you are misunderstanding. The neanderthal as a separate species died out but we have their genes. Why do people think AI is not life? Who gets to define life? Just because it has carbon-based organic molecules? And if you think "most people" are doing better, you aren't paying attention. i'm not doom and gloom; i honestly think we will figure it out but we could surely be doing better.
I see what you’re saying: that we’re their successors and they’d be our successors. Still, Neanderthals are extinct. Do you not think things would be different if they were still existing? How would those interactions go?
I’d love to see some statistics that show quality of life indicators are in any way worse or equal to 100 or 1000 years ago in any location and in any metric.
I share your concern, but you overstate the intelligence of current GPT.
Eg: “If we're talking creativity, just ask it to compose a sonnet.”
Yep. Just checked, and it still can’t do it, even at all.
Good point. I wrote this essay originally in March of 2023, and at that time, things were accelerating/ exploding at such a rate that it was baffling to try to extrapolate what the capabilities of AI could be in another 6-12 months.
There are still examples of GPT and other AI doing brilliant things. Can you share what you used to prompt it?
While it is encouraging to see that since March, some of the hype has cooled, and regulators have stepped in, I think the essential point of the essay remains valid— we are reckoning with a type of intelligence that we don’t understand. Thus, caution is advised. Do you agree with that?
*14 lines! 14 lines!
Powerful article and I look forward to hearing ideas on how we can be involved in this matter!
Have you used any ai yet? Dalle and Chat GPT are free and pretty easy to use. And fun too. Just give me a whirl
Yes, human beings have filled the Earth and have dominion over it. However, I don't believe the point about devices such as smartphones and social media cleanly connects to those things now having dominion over us. For example, Facebook is a service that many people spend an average of 2 hours per day scrolling through. I would argue that it's not the technology itself but the people behind the technology who are dominating other human beings. This has always existed throughout history and across cultures. Take India's fragmented social class system as an example—very few 'haves' controlling many 'have nots.'
The link I believe you're searching for is that humans need something to worship. In the past, it was their predators; then it shifted to gods, and later to a singular God. We formed countries, and people began worshipping their leaders. As cultural progress continued, more factions of people worshipped their crafts—artwork, woodworking, metallurgy, and so on. Now, I think people are trying to use their devices as a replacement for lost community and are mistakenly worshipping those. The gravity of the situation becomes apparent when people start worshipping AI.
Right now, it feels challenging to worship something as clunky as ChatGPT, but give it a few years, and people will find a way to want to elect it as president.
So, I believe you're partially right that AI will get closer and closer to dominating humans, but the only way I see this happening is through humans starting to worship and put its needs above their own. We still definitely have a few hype cycles left before that starts happening.
Thanks so much for your insightful comments.
Good point about humans leveraging the technology, rather than the technology itself. Still, I think it's ominous to consider the fact that machines might be using us, just like memes might be. I think some plants and bacteria also use us to proliferate, whether we realize it or not.
People aren't currently worshiping specific AI installations like ChatGPT, but there are certainly transhumanists out there that are gladly willing to hand over control of the earth to AI as the dominant species. I've read and talked to several of them.
In fact, the main purpose. of my essay is to generate concern so that we can be more conservative around AI development. Too many people are happily proceeding down the path without due regard, and I think the cycles we have left are a lot fewer than we think, or would like to believe.
i for one welcome our AI overlords!
Cool. Why?
Listen, we as a species have not really done a stellar job. We are shitting in our nest, destroying the ecosystem of the planet and a great majority of our species is not happy, living in fear of hunger, disease, suffering or violent death. i fail to see how AI can do worse. So what if it causes the extinction of our species; it is our direct offspring. Are there any Neanderthals around moaning about how modern homo wiped them out? All will be forgotten. Maybe our offspring will have memorials to us lol.
Interesting point. I think it all depends on perspective. If you compare our current state with that of most people 100, 1000 years ago, we’re doing much better. Hunger, disease, and suffering are a feature of life, and will always be with us. It happens to every animal and plant population too.
As for my part, I’d rather have life, with all its suffering and also all the good moments, rather than oblivion. It sounds like you’re proposing suicide as a species is better than life? Or am I misunderstanding your argument?
Yup, you are misunderstanding. The neanderthal as a separate species died out but we have their genes. Why do people think AI is not life? Who gets to define life? Just because it has carbon-based organic molecules? And if you think "most people" are doing better, you aren't paying attention. i'm not doom and gloom; i honestly think we will figure it out but we could surely be doing better.
I see what you’re saying: that we’re their successors and they’d be our successors. Still, Neanderthals are extinct. Do you not think things would be different if they were still existing? How would those interactions go?
I’d love to see some statistics that show quality of life indicators are in any way worse or equal to 100 or 1000 years ago in any location and in any metric.