AI could cause social conflicts

It all depends on the sensitivity of the AI

This post could relate to you directly or indirectly, imagine a future where the line between humans and machines becomes so thin that we start to question whether our artificial creations can really think, feel or even suffer, sounds like a good script for a movie, but this possibility is becoming increasingly plausible according to experts.

For Professor Jonathan Birch of the London School of Economics, we are on the verge of major social ruptures driven by the debate between consciousness and Artificial Intelligence, something that he believes is closer to reality than many imagined.

The study.

A recent study co-written by Jonathan Birch and other renowned academics predicts that AI systems capable of demonstrating some degree of consciousness could emerge as early as 2035 and this idea is already generating divisions, on the one hand those who see these technologies as simple sophisticated algorithms, a kind of luxury calculator, on the other a growing group of people who believe that machines could develop emotions of pain or joy.

As Jonathan Birch explained, “We will have subcultures that will see the other side as making big mistakes, some Humans will accuse others of cruel exploitation and those others will see them as deluded for believing that there is consciousness where there is none” but these debates are not only philosophical anymore. we see reflections in real life, jetbot as a replica and Replika AI have become virtual companions for millions of users and in extreme cases these interactions have crossed boundaries.

A crisis of “digital consciousness” is approaching

Tragically a few days ago, a teenager took his own life after developing an intense bond with a jetbot that imitated a fictional character. These incidents reveal the emotional complexity that these interactions can trigger even when experts insist that technology has no real feelings; Governments and companies are also attentive to this possible crisis of digital awareness.

In the coming days, representatives from several countries and technology giants will meet in San Francisco to discuss guidelines that can mitigate the risks associated with the rapid advancement of AI, while some like Jonathan Birch call for a more cautious approach prioritizing the analysis of possible signs of consciousness. , large corporations seem reluctant to divert their attention from purely commercial objectives.

Part of the difficulty lies in the definition of what consciousness is, for many “consciousness goes beyond processing information or making intelligent decisions, it is the subjective experience of being alive, of feeling emotions and perceiving the world in a unique way.” Although GPT AI chat models have demonstrated behaviors that simulate pleasure or pain in games, the question of whether this reflects a real internal experience remains open.

Jonathan Birch proposes that if we want to explore the possibilities of consciousness in AI we should follow criteria similar to those we use to evaluate animal sensitivity, just as we consider that an octopus is more sensitive than an oyster perhaps we should investigate whether a jetbot is capable of “feel” joy or frustration.

This evaluation is not merely technical, it would also raise ethical questions about “the rights” of these entities, the divisions that Jonathan Birch foresees could manifest on a global scale influenced by culture, religion or ideology; Countries with more traditional views such as Saudi Arabia could interpret consciousness differently than more secular nations, even within families debates about the authenticity of interactions with jetbots or avatars of loved ones could generate deep emotional conflicts.

I think that even here among the readers of this platform there must be this division, confirm me if I am right, write in the comments if you think that AI can or cannot be a conscious and/or sentient being, despite the controversy about consciousness in the AI remains a hypothesis and many scientists remain skeptical, with many believing that artificial systems are unlikely to achieve anything approaching the human experience but warning that completely ruling out the possibility would be unwise.

Meanwhile, the entire world watches, restlessly fascinated, at the advancement of this technology that promises to revolutionize our lives but could also force us to redefine what it means to be conscious. We are ready for this debate, perhaps the answer lies in the next generation of machines and in the decisions we make now.