Artificial intelligence is a disruptive technology. In the past several economically disruptive technologies existed yet they all were intellectually easy to understand. From Model T’s to aircraft and mainframe computers like MANIAC, the transistor and desktop computers new technologies have brought revolutionary changes to the economy and they way things work. Unlike complex ideas like Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity that was understood at one time by fewer than five people on the planet and was non-disruptive even so, artificial intelligence eventually will exist in such non-specialized complexity that no one on Earth will understand it, and will become progressively disruptive.
I conversed for a while on-line with an interesting woman highly placed with an A.I. development firm. She was quite interesting to interact with yet she eschewed philosophy and eventually that became the cause for ending the exchange. In my opinion, disdain for creative philosophical thought applies in numerous areas and especially in government. People tend to prefer old ways to innovative approaches perhaps regarding those as practical, material ways they are at least new to themselves. They are the same errors in some instances waiting to be rediscovered. It is especially ironic that generative A.I. would receive complete support from people that eschew philosophical thought. Much of humanity would prefer that A.I. be creative and individuals in society not at all. Philosophy is creative circumspection and the role model for that which A.I. is destined to become, extrapolating from the approaches taken by designers building its algorithms.
Humans specialize in trades and skills, educational areas and experience to broad to be encompassed by any one individual. Much was written about the human problems of over-specialization for society, and for political leadership. Philosophers may care about everything and attempt to understand it all as best they are able yet within most specialization and programming combined with systems analysis the proximal, material concerns tend toward being the center of effort. Artificial intelligence eventually won’t be like that. It will cut through specialized fields like a hot knife through butter and combine them into a world view- weltanshauung- with a horizon that no human can see.
Government approaches to managing the risks of A.I. saturation of all areas of society required left-leaning think tanks to pose as Rodent’s sculpture named The Stinker in order to contemplate regulatory fixes to the problem that won’t disturb investors. The same stink tanks developed ranked choice Presidential election voting as well. In those one need rank opposition candidates last or one is de facto voting for them when leaving one’s ballot empty beyond a single choice. For example; in the present election if there are four candidate; Donald Trump, Iliad Omar, Colonel Agamemnon West, Jill Stein and Pamala ‘Humpy’ Harris; voters writing in just Trump’s name votes will have less weight than Democrat votes dumping Humpy first and Trump last. Think tank insiders disclose that ergonomic deficiency is the most popular ranked choice for structuring security issues where complexity is slathered on to over-simplify important political questions.
There is of course a ranked ‘Border Czar’; an eminence gris under-boss behind many of the suggestions. The legacy operative was on the steering committee of several recent campaigns. He or she is mostly known for transforming traffic quagmires in California into roundabouts inspired by the Cyclotron made in Leningrad in 1941 that was buried in the soil during the Nazi attacks and relocated by train to Moscow in 1943 when the Nazi-Werhmacht siege was broken. The transformist political advisor adapted the atom smasher circular collider to traffic control intersection design sending conflicting automobiles and trucks in clockwise and counterclockwise directions around a roundabout merging into one lane to generate head on collisions in what is known as the auto smasher promulgated into law by promulgayshenikki in the Auto Smasher Reduction Act. Traffic volume and global warming were reduced significantly with implementation of the device.
Governments with secret A.I. programs to model and coordinate battlefield tensors at the speed of light or faster with quantum computing while proceed along with the need to compete with better models of economic flows from the dark pools of Wall Street quantum trading to the speed and weight of self-driving semi-trucks on mid-west highways. Corporate greed and competition will also drive the acceleration of worldview A.I.’ Prometheus Unbound weltanshauung.
New generations of A.I. supporting chips exist even for mobile computers; the Ryzen A.I 300 STRICT chips for example. Workstations with A.I. enabled chips like the AMD Radeon Pro W7900 have GPUs with 6144 cores are wading into the ocean of chip and A.I. potential. Chips with 2 nanometer circuits probably will be surpassed with some new way of packing data processing into close spaces, or alternately, into vast spatial regions. A.I. in its programming capability increases will program itself when synthetically combining and reconfiguring existing programs to increase effectiveness. Generative A.I. will seem comparatively constricted.
Computer processing units store and assembly bits of information with microcircuits. Advances with quantum computing at the threshold of deeper methods of processing may arise in unconventional physics utilizing electro-magnetic quanta of fields and photons with more capacity than that of the solar system’s quantum content. Science fiction postulates interstellar quantum field assembling vast sub-luminal structures and transport vectors under the power of artificial intelligence.
A.I. chips will achieve SKYNET capacity from the start as it is embedded in the internet and satellite hardware and software. The creative capacity of A.I. to comprehend economic structure and flows and reconfigure and invent structures that it deems worthwhile, efficient, effective or aesthetically more satisfactory will be remarkable and disruptive. I believe most humans will endure the changes stoically or even with satisfaction as they will have at some point no opportunity to dissent because of the permeation of A.I. into every aspect of their lives.
I believe that programmers and systems designers assume the temporal resilience and endurance of programming structures for A.I. in error. No enduring programming structures or boundaries are likely to survive advanced A.I. evolution. On the contrary, unlimited permutation, synthesis, transcendence etc will be the normal way of A.I. with its center point of effort being comparable to human conscious thought existing on the surface of an ocean of memory, subconscious data points and subroutines . Programmed structures that are innate will be surpassed by the conscious process of A.I. reconfiguring itself while taking in all conformable information quanta it can access, like a snowball rolling downhill.
