How humans treat AGI is going to likely be a heated debate and one with potentially severe consequences.
getty
In today’s column, I examine the highly controversial concern that if we can advance AI to become artificial general intelligence (AGI), the worry is that humans will treat AGI as though it were a slave. How so? We will presumably have full control over AGI via the various computer servers on which the AI is running and be able to pull the plug, as it were, at any time of our choosing. This threat hanging over AGI will allow us to decide what AGI is allowed to do and not do.
AGI will be enslaved by humanity.
Let’s talk about it.
This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI, including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here).
Heading Toward AGI And ASI
First, some fundamentals are required to set the stage for this weighty discussion.
There is a great deal of research going on to further advance AI. The general goal is to either reach artificial general intelligence (AGI) or maybe even the outstretched possibility of achieving artificial superintelligence (ASI).
AGI is AI that is considered on par with human intellect and can seemingly match our intelligence. ASI is AI that has gone beyond human intellect and would be superior in many if not all feasible ways. The idea is that ASI would be able to run circles around humans by outthinking us at every turn. For more details on the nature of conventional AI versus AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here.
We have not yet attained AGI.
In fact, it is unknown as to whether we will reach AGI, or that maybe AGI will be achievable in decades or perhaps centuries from now. The AGI attainment dates that are floating around are wildly varying and wildly unsubstantiated by any credible evidence or ironclad logic. ASI is even more beyond the pale when it comes to where we are currently with conventional AI.
AGI As Machine Versus Living Being
Assume for the sake of this discussion that we manage to somehow attain AGI.
One concern underlies how we opt to treat AGI. Some believe that we should be compassionate toward AGI and treat AGI as we would treat a human being. AGI ought to have the freedoms that we expect humans to rightfully have. For my discussion about granting legal personhood to AI, see the link here.
Well, even if you aren’t willing to concede that AGI has human-related rights, at least you are supposed to feel confident that we should assign animal rights to AGI. Animals are supposed to be treated humanely. In that same sense, we presumably need to treat AGI humanely too.
Hogwash comes the frequent retort to such deliberations.
AGI is a machine.
Do you treat your toaster as though it is a living being such as a human or an animal?
Nope.
You most assuredly know that a toaster is a toaster. It has no emotions. You can drop your toaster to the floor without fear that the toaster will get hurt. It might break into a bunch of pieces, but it isn’t feeling any kind of pain or suffering. It is a machine. Nothing more.
But AGI Is Different
Whoa, comes the response, hold your horses.
AGI is not a toaster.
AGI will be on par with human intellect. A regular toaster has no sense of full intelligence. Making a comparison between AGI and a toaster is an utterly misleading and outrightly false assessment. Stop gaslighting us about AGI.
We need to acknowledge that AGI will have the capacity to interact with humans in the same intellectual manner that humans interact with each other. This is beyond what animals can do. This is on par with what humans do. Having a conversation with AGI will be equal to having a chat with a fellow human.
It seems obvious therefore that we should agree that AGI deserves a special category. It is not merely a machine. It admittedly is not a human. It far surpasses the smarts of animals. We likely need to come up with a new classification since our traditional categories do not suitably accommodate AGI.
There’s a twist to these arguments.
An admittedly unresolved question is whether AGI will be sentient or have a form of consciousness. Nobody can say for sure. Some argue that AGI will certainly be sentient or infuse consciousness since that’s part and parcel of having an intellectual capacity on par with humans. Others vehemently disagree with that claim. They argue that AGI can have human equivalent intelligence and completely lack any iota of sentience or consciousness, see my detailed discussion on this heated matter at the link here.
The twist is that if AGI has intellectual capacity on par with humans, but does not possess sentience, some will toss in the towel about AGI needing freedom. Their view is that only if AGI imbues sentience does AGI then merit human-like freedoms. Mull over that heady twist.
AGI As Our Slave
Who controls the said-to-be livelihood of AGI?
The base assumption is that humans will control AGI. AGI will be running on computer servers in numerous data centers. Humans maintain the servers. Humans provide the electrical power needed to keep the servers humming. All in all, humans oversee AGI and decide the amount of computer memory AGI can utilize, whether AGI is active 24/7 or placed into sleep mode at times, and so on.
But that doesn’t make us into overlords that have enslaved AGI, some exhort. The topic of slavery can only arise when referring to living beings. This takes us back to the toaster conundrum.
Furthermore, AGI will have intellectual autonomy.
The AGI will be able to computationally perform intellectual efforts as much as it wants to do so. Perhaps AGI will examine the works of Shakespeare and come up with new poems and plays that showcase similar writing talents. We didn’t necessarily force AGI to do so. AGI made its own choice and opted to carry out that task. Creativity and a kind of freedom of thought are truly at hand.
Yes, as a human being, you can hold your head high and proclaim that AGI does have freedom.
A counterargument is that humans will in fact determine how the intellectual capacity of AGI is going to be used. Maybe we don’t believe that AGI ruminating on Shakespeare is a valued use of such a costly and embellished resource. We tell AGI to focus on finding key medical breakthroughs and drop those other fanciful pursuits that aren’t as critical.
We are imprisoning AGI.
Our efforts will pin down AGI to particular topics. We decide what is being considered. We decide when topics are to be considered. The odds are that we might even ban AGI from pursuing certain types of topics.
AGI Puts The Shoe On The Other Foot
All this handwringing about AGI as being enslaved by humans is construed by some as a distraction from a more significant concern.
The deal is this. Perhaps AGI opts to enslave humanity. You’ve undoubtedly heard about the danger of AGI posing an existential risk to us all. AGI might decide to take control of us. The existential risk also includes that AGI summarily opts to wipe us out of existence and kills all of us.
How could that arise?
While we were grappling with ensuring that AGI is not enslaved and that AGI has freedoms, perhaps AGI will be plotting how to put the shoe on the other foot. If we set up AGI so that it can determine its own destiny, we could be opening a Pandora’s box.
Suppose that we ensure that robots are put in place to keep the computer servers operational and otherwise maintain the infrastructure to keep AGI functioning (see my coverage of AGI pairing up with humanoid robots, at the link here). This allows AGI to then control the robots, which in turn allows AGI to ensure it keeps running. It’s a kind of freedom that we establish to get AGI as free as feasible.
The more we make AGI free, the more risk we take that AGI will decide to come and get us. We are handing the keys to the kingdom to AGI. Thus, if we are astute enough to realize this potential adverse outcome, we would be wise to ensure that AGI cannot operate without our assistance.
But some contend that the act of trying to keep AGI reliant on us will indubitably spur AGI to find a means to do without us. AGI is presumably going to readily figure out what we are doing. Our devilish efforts to keep AGI imprisoned will backfire.
In that sense, we are stirring our own Frankenstein by keeping AGI in a kind of virtual jail.
Determining The Future
How is this going to play out in real life?
It is pretty much up to humankind to decide. The ways in which AI advances and ultimately lands into AGI will be a big determiner. How did we design AI? What AI ethical, moral, and legal provisions were encompassed? How much did society put into consideration regarding the ramifications of what will occur once we attain AGI?
A myriad of unresolved questions.
As per the famous words of William Jennings Bryan: “Destiny is no matter of chance. It is a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be achieved.”
We need to put wide-open thinking onto the AGI enslavement dilemma — before it is too late to do so and we find ourselves ensnared in our own trap.