top of page

Sam Harris: Can we build AI without losing control over it?

  • Saif Al Basri
  • 30. Sept. 2016
  • 2 Min. Lesezeit

Will we be able to control Artificial Intelligence in the future?

Considering AI from a philosophical and moral perspective is definitely something we ought to do. Especially, because the way we perceive the world, our ethics that guide us, our economic and social needs and our future imaginations, cloud over our impact on AI and its core-design.

AI and its implications are certainly worth looking at deeply. I was relieved to see Sam did not try to prophesy exactly what AI's impacts would be. However, Sam delivers the right questions we should collectively contemplate. To predict the future is very difficult; nevertheless, it's an important topic to talk about, and crucial to our existence in the near future. The first step would be trying to understand the implications of AI. Sam also refers to the unavoidable Singularity, which is best defined by Michal Anissimov: "Smarter-than-human intelligence. That's all. Whether it's created through Artificial Intelligence, Brain-Computer Interfacing, neurosurgery, genetic engineering, or whatever—the Singularity is the point at which our ability to predict the future breaks down because a new character is introduced that is different from all prior characters in the human story. That character is greater-than-human intelligence, whether an enhanced human or a robot."

Once the Singularity has been reached, machine intelligence will be infinitely more powerful than all human intelligence combined; and if we trust our best scientists in this area, then mankind is heading toward an irrevocable destiny in which we will evolve beyond our understanding through the use of technology. The problem is, that humans think of the future in simple terms that they can grasp, on incredibly short timelines that they can interpret, and history doesn't create itself considering those limits, nor technology does; and almost nobody [statistically speaking] understands computers. This is a weak spot we should take seriously! Here is TedTalk:

bottom of page