Will AI take over the world?

In the booklet "Will Artificial Intelligence Outsmart Us?" Stephen Hawking contends that artificial intelligence is superior than humans. After reading the book, I found myself questioning the assumptions and premises on which he based his conclusions. In this post, I will explore his argument and explain why I believe it is flawed.

Let us first look at Hawking's assumptions. His first premise implies that computers, when it comes to computing, behave like brain prosthesis. The second assumption is about the evolution of life according to macroevolution theory. His first premise is based on these two assumptions, which imply that there is no substantial difference between how the brain and computers interpret information.

The second premise is based on the idea that an earthworm's brain works similarly to a human brain due to the lack of a quantum distinction based on evolution. On the basis of these premises, Hawking believes that computers can, in theory, replicate human intelligence and even surpass it.

Considering this conclusion, Hawking introduces another hypothesis, that technological growth occurs at a quicker rate, as indicated by Moor's Law. By connecting this premise with the prior conclusion, he arrives at a second conclusion: artificial intelligence technology will soon surpass human intelligence. This prognosis is based on the reality that human development, which is slowed by biological evolution, cannot keep up with the rapid progress of artificial intelligence.

As a result, the final conclusion reached is that machine intelligence will surpass human intellect and acquire pace once it is capable of developing its own iterations, which humans cannot accomplish as well. This advancement might occur in a constructive way, assisting humanity, or in a negative way, working against humanity.

As a result, the crucial question is how humans can keep control over artificial intelligence. Furthermore, how can humans assure that artificial intelligence's aims correspond with those of humanity? Given that artificial intelligence can attain its goals considerably faster than humans can, misalignment of goals can have negative consequences.

In summation, Stephen Hawking's reasoning in his booklet implies that artificial intelligence is superior to human intelligence. However, upon closer inspection, it is clear that the assumptions, premises, and conclusions are suspect. It is critical to acknowledge the limitations of our understanding of the human brain as well as the uncertainty surrounding future technological advancement. Rather than fearing artificial intelligence's dominance, it is critical to focus on using technology as a tool to boost human intelligence and creativity, assuring harmony between its goals and those of mankind.

Now, taking this point into consideration, let us go deeper into the issue. We start with the first level of premises. There could be substantial variations between how an earthworm's brain operates and how computers handle information and data. The notion that they operate in the same way is erroneous. Throughout history, whenever humans progressed technology, they likened it to the workings of the human brain since it is the best model for comprehending cognitive processes. As a result, suggesting that computers behave like earthworm brains simply suggests that we are utilising present technology to understand the minds of real organisms, which may be inaccurate.

The second premise asserts that there is no difference in the functioning of an earthworm's brain and a human brain. However, this premise poses concerns because humans have consciousness, awareness, and subjective experience that earthworms may not have. As a result, these premises point to a knowledge gap that our argument ignores. As a result, we can only claim that computers, in the form of AI, can imitate our current understanding of brain activity. However, we must accept that there are many brain processes and elements that we do not fully understand, and it is these unknown workings that artificial intelligence may be unable to mimic.

Let's move on to the second level of premises. Moore's Law, which suggests the high pace of technology advancement, underpins these principles. It is crucial to highlight, however, that Moore's fact is an observation made by Gordon Moore rather than an underlying scientific or natural fact. While this observation has proven true to some extent, it is not certain to continue permanently. Without a doubt, technology will advance quicker than human growth, which is hampered by the slow speed of biological evolution. However, claiming that it will precisely follow Moore's Law is incorrect.

Considering these criteria, we can infer that artificial intelligence, albeit restricted by our current understanding, has the ability to emulate certain operations of the human brain. Due to our limited knowledge, it does not necessarily imply a complete replication of the brain's numerous capabilities. As a result, I believe that artificial intelligence will advance rapidly and eventually surpass human capabilities in certain cognitive activities. However, these repetitions must not be confused with human ingenuity.

Artificial intelligence will not be able to dominate or outwit human intelligence in the future. Instead, it will improve human intelligence by acting as a tool to boost our inventiveness. Humans must develop ways to incorporate artificial intelligence into their work while without viewing it as a rival. We can strike a balance and ensure that the crucial feature, which was ignored in the small pamphlet, is fully acknowledged by utilising artificial intelligence to increase our own creativity.

This article was proofread by ChatGPT.

Source:
Stephen Hawkings, 2018, Will Artificial Intelligence Outsmart Us?, Spacetime Publications Limit.