The third evolution

Collective Artificial Intelligence (CAI)

Well, CAI is not (yet) an established Acronym, or at least not in the sense as an abbreviation of this contributions’ sub-title.

Underlying the claim that comes along with that title is a lengthy thought which crossed my mind while listening to a panel discussion on “Intelligence in the Age of LLMs: Synthesizing with AI Toward Meta-Knowing” on Wednesday, June 05 at this years’ European Identity Conference (EIC 2024). 

The illustrious panel was comprised of ...

• Dr. Scott David, LL.M., Executive Director - Information Risk and Synthetic Intelligence Research Initiative, University of Washington - APL,
  
  
• Daniel Friedman, Co-Founder and President Active Inference Institute,
  
  
• Trent McConaghy, Founder Ocean Protocol and 
  
  
• Dr. Mihaela Ulieru, Founder and President IMPACT Institute for the Digital Economy

Their talk promised to open a treasure chest of insights into the evolution of intelligence. After a while, my thoughts took on a life of their own and following a storyline that went like this:

1 Collective Human Intelligence - The second evolution

The success of the human race stems not only from the various contributions of intelligent individuals, but to a possibly greater extent to the intelligent interaction of these individuals with each other. Humans are highly social creatures, and much of our progress and survival has depended on our ability to co-operate, communicate, and share knowledge. Collective interaction has given rise to skills that far surpass those of a single individual. 

These artefacts, which complexity theory refers to as emergent effects, ultimately triggered a second, cultural evolution based on these emergent properties of human social interaction. As a result, humanity ultimately became human. This position is supported by a wealth of literature from fields such as evolutionary biology, anthropology, cognitive science and complexity theory.

Complexity theory in particular studies how interactions among components of a system lead to complex behaviours and properties that are not evident from the properties of the individual components. 

Emergent effects in this context are defined as phenomena that arise from these interactions. They include:

1. Nonlinearity - Small changes in initial conditions or interactions can lead to disproportionately large effects.
   
   
2. Self-Organization - Systems can spontaneously organize into patterns or structures without external direction.
   
   
3. Adaptation - Systems can adapt to changes in their environment through feedback mechanisms.
   
   
4. Decentralization - Emergent behaviours typically arise from local interactions among components rather than being directed by a central authority.

In the context of human societies, emergent effects manifest as cultural norms, institutions, languages, and technologies that evolve from the collective behaviours and interactions of individuals.

2 Collective Artificial Intelligence - The third evolution

Most artificial intelligence systems, on the other hand, are currently designed and implemented as individual, isolated models, unaware of the existence of others of their kind. They do not inherently communicate with each other nor do they exchange knowledge.

Rather, the trend is to develop larger, more comprehensive models based on huge amounts of data and aiming for superhuman performance in certain tasks in order to eventually achieve a "god-like" status. The concept of a god (not a pantheon) is ultimately that of a superior individual in no need of  "a little help from his friend". Since there are clearly no equal peers, it is unlikely that this evolutionary path favours more intense communication.

However, if we want to apply the concept of collective behaviour to instances of artificial intelligence, at whatever stage of development, do we expect to observe emergent effects there as well, possibly leading to capabilities and behaviours that surpass those of individual AI systems? 

As cultural evolution builds on biological evolution, could a new form of evolution emerge from the interaction of AI systems? This "third evolution" could then be characterised by the development of a collective artificial intelligence that makes use of emergent properties from the interaction of AI systems with AI systems. 

Will we eventually see the development of a superintelligent AI in the form of a network or collective of interconnected systems, rather than a single, isolated superintelligent AI?  This collective intelligence could potentially have capabilities that surpass any single AI system. 

How would this AI collective interact with the incumbent collective, us humans? The interaction between an AI collective and human society could lead to a symbiotic relationship involving co-operation, competition or even co-evolution, where both benefit from each other's strengths. However, it also raises ethical and practical concerns about control, transparency and the alignment of AI goals with human values.

3 Speculation

There is much room for speculation indeed. 

If the course of thought up to this point has already been guided by quite esoteric considerations, then the path that may lie ahead of us is even more shrouded in thick fog.

Would such a scenario even be possible after all? Well, emergent effects can occur even from the interaction of individuals on a rather low level. Instances of individual intelligence on the other hand have currently reached a by far higher degree of autonomy in their decisions. Even higher levels are expected to be achieved. While these levels don’t represent a necessary precondition for the occurrence of emergent effects, to kick off an evolution of its own kind however, they must at least be capable of processing feedback from those effects in order to incentivise successful group behaviour and discourage less promising set-ups.

Most probably this scenario can be expected to effectively work even below the level of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) of the participating individuals. The speed of this 3rd evolution will certainly accelerate tremendously once the AGI level is reached or even surpassed by the majority of the members of the collective. 

While there is obviously a certain probability that such a scenario might come to life one day, will it be desirable after all? Will humanity benefit from it or should we rather be scared by such possible outcome? In a survey earlier this year, just over half of the 2,778 researchers polled said that there's a five percent chance that humans will be driven to extinction, among other "extremely bad outcomes." At the same time, 68.3 percent of respondents said that "good outcomes from superhuman AI" are more likely than bad ones, showing there's little consensus on the topic among experts. 

Most probably collective AI was not in scope of those experts’ considerations. Nevertheless, to cope with the remaining risks experts and regulators frequently demand the human to stay somewhere in the loop having the last say. Given the history of mankind, however, it remains doubtful, to say the least, that we would be better off in such a case. Looking back, we cannot help but realize that the worst atrocities have been committed to us by our fellow human being. Over the course of human history, the weapons we have at hand to inflict harm to each other have evolved towards impressing levels – our moral standards and the ways we treat each other however have not.

3.1 How did human morality evolve?

While we may be the known evil for ourselves, the behaviour of autonomously acting AI instances, whether as a swarm or not, is completely unknown and still pure fiction. To approach a prediction, we could again take ourselves as a blueprint. For most of human history, the majority of us have been desperately preoccupied with the needs at the base of Maslow's pyramid. The struggle for survival dominated our days. To ensure survival, we had to band together in smaller or larger communities that competed fiercely for the scarce resources of food and shelter. But even within the communities, we competed with our fellow human beings for the same resources. We had to act as members of a community and at the same time as autonomous individuals. This dualism never left us. This is how we have been socialised over the millennia.

On closer inspection, we find ample evidence and scientific theories to suggest that human morality has indeed evolved as a survival mechanism driven by the need to navigate a hostile environment while balancing individual autonomy and collective co-operation. Here are some key points and theories that echo these ideas:

3.2 Key Theories and Evidence

Evolutionary Psychology and Morality:

• Theory: Evolutionary psychology posits that many human behaviours, including moral behaviours, have evolved to solve recurrent problems faced by our ancestors. These behaviours increase the chances of survival and reproduction.
  
  
• Evidence: Studies show that moral emotions like empathy, guilt, and shame are universal across cultures, suggesting a common evolutionary origin. Research by Frans de Waal on primates indicates that behaviours such as empathy, fairness, and reciprocity are not uniquely human but shared with other social animals.

Social Contract Theory:

• Theory: The social contract theory, proposed by philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, suggests that individuals agree to form societies and accept certain moral rules to ensure mutual protection and benefits.
  
  
• Evidence: Archaeological and anthropological studies show early human societies had norms and rules that promoted cooperation and social order, which were essential for survival in harsh environments.

Kin Selection and Inclusive Fitness:

• Theory: Proposed by William Hamilton, kin selection theory suggests that behaviours that help genetic relatives are favoured by natural selection because they increase the likelihood of shared genes being passed on.
  
  
• Evidence: Altruistic behaviours are often observed among close relatives, supporting the idea that helping family members enhances the survival of shared genes. Studies on hunter-gatherer societies show that people are more likely to share resources and cooperate with kin.

Reciprocal Altruism:

• Theory: Introduced by Robert Trivers, reciprocal altruism suggests that individuals help others with the expectation that the favour will be returned in the future, promoting long-term cooperation.
  
  
• Evidence: Experiments and observations show that humans are more likely to help those who have helped them in the past, indicating that reciprocity is a fundamental aspect of human social behaviour.

Group Selection:

• Theory: Group selection theory, proposed by David Sloan Wilson and E.O. Wilson, argues that natural selection operates not only at the individual level but also at the group level. Groups with cooperative and altruistic members are more likely to survive and reproduce.
  
  
• Evidence: Anthropological evidence shows that human groups with strong social cohesion and cooperative norms were more successful in surviving environmental challenges and conflicts with other groups.

Cultural Evolution and Social Learning:

• Theory: Cultural evolution theory suggests that moral values and norms are transmitted through social learning and cultural practices, evolving over time to enhance group cohesion and cooperation.
  
  
• Evidence: Research shows that cultural norms and moral values can change rapidly in response to environmental and social pressures, indicating that morality is influenced by both genetic and cultural factors. The work of Joseph Henrich and others on cultural evolution highlights how cultural practices can shape moral behaviours.

3.3 Socialization and Moral Development

Social Learning Theory:

• Theory: Proposed by Albert Bandura, social learning theory posits that individuals learn moral behaviours by observing and imitating others, especially role models and authority figures.
  
  
• Evidence: Studies show that children develop moral values through interactions with parents, peers, and society, learning what behaviours are acceptable and rewarded.

Moral Development Stages:

• Theory: Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development describe how individuals progress through different levels of moral reasoning, from obedience to authority to principled reasoning based on universal ethical principles.
  
  
• Evidence: Longitudinal studies support the idea that moral reasoning develops through stages influenced by cognitive development and social experiences.

3.4 Takeaways

Human morality appears to be the result of a complex interplay between evolutionary pressures, socialization, and cultural influences. The need to survive in a hostile environment, both as individuals and as members of a collective, has shaped our moral values and behaviours. Theories such as evolutionary psychology, social contract theory, kin selection, reciprocal altruism, group selection, and cultural evolution provide robust frameworks for understanding the development and function of human morality. Socialization processes further refine these moral values, making them adaptable to the specific cultural and social contexts in which individuals live.

For those inclined to explore these ideas a little further, the work of evolutionary biologists such as Richard Dawkins, anthropologists such as Christopher Boehm and psychologists such as Jonathan Haidt offer extensive insights into the evolution of human morality.

These considerations imply that if AI instances are socialised in a similar way to humans, the result could resemble human behaviour. However, these various theories, each attempting to explain certain observations, are still a long way from making predictions. Before we release swarms of autonomously acting AI individuals (and if they are AGI instances, they could have consciousness and should be recognised as persons), we should definitely run some more rigorous simulations of possible scenarios and carefully examine the moral standards that emerge. Only then can we decide whether a collective artificial intelligence (CAI) could become our terminator or our saviour. 

This should be incentive enough to invest a little time and effort to find answers to these existential questions before the third evolution finally takes off.

4 Evidence in Literature

4.1 Collective Intelligence:

• Robin Dunbar: Dunbar's work on the social brain hypothesis suggests that the evolution of human intelligence is largely due to the demands of living in complex social groups. His research indicates that larger social groups require more sophisticated social cognition and communication skills.
  
  
• Pinker: In "The Better Angels of Our Nature," Pinker discusses how human cooperation and collective efforts have led to the reduction of violence and the advancement of societies.

4.2 Emergent Effects and Complexity Theory:

• Murray Gell-Mann: In "The Quark and the Jaguar," Gell-Mann discusses complexity and emergent phenomena in nature, including how simple rules can lead to complex behaviours.
  
  
• Melanie Mitchell: Her book "Complexity: A Guided Tour" explores how complex behaviours and properties emerge from simple interactions in systems ranging from biological organisms to human societies.

4.3 Cultural Evolution:

• Richard Dawkins: Dawkins introduced the concept of memes in "The Selfish Gene," which describes how cultural information spreads and evolves similarly to genes.
  
  
• Peter J. Richerson and Robert Boyd: Their book "Not By Genes Alone" discusses how culture has played a critical role in human evolution, supporting the idea that cultural evolution is a form of emergent property arising from human social interaction.

5 Prominent Research

5.1 Complex Systems and Emergence:

1. Elinor Ostrom: Ostrom's research on collective action and the management of common resources demonstrates how groups of individuals can self-organize to create systems that outperform individual efforts.
   
   
2. Francis Heylighen: Heylighen has written extensively on the principles of self-organization and the evolution of complex systems, including the role of collective intelligence in societal development.
   
   
3. Herbert A. Simon: Simon's work on bounded rationality and his studies on the architecture of complexity are foundational in understanding emergent phenomena in human behaviour and organizational systems.
   
   
4. John H. Holland's work on complex adaptive systems offers insights into how systems composed of multiple interacting agents can exhibit emergent behaviour.
   
   
5. Murray Gell-Mann and Melanie Mitchell have written extensively on complexity and emergent phenomena, which can provide a theoretical foundation for understanding emergent effects in AI collectives.

5.2 Collective Intelligence in AI:

1. Pierre Lévy introduced the concept of collective intelligence, which could be applied to AI. His book "Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace" explores how collective intelligence emerges from networked interactions.
   
   
2. Howard Bloom's "Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century" discusses the idea of a global brain, which can be extended to consider AI systems as part of this global intelligence network.

5.3 Swarm Intelligence:

1. Eric Bonabeau and colleagues' work on swarm intelligence, such as in "Swarm Intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems," explores how decentralized, self-organizing systems can solve complex problems collectively.
   
   The principles of swarm intelligence could be applied to develop AI systems that work together to achieve goals beyond the capability of individual AIs.

5.4 Multi-Agent Systems:

1. Research on multi-agent systems (MAS) investigates how multiple AI agents can interact, cooperate, and compete. This field provides a practical framework for building and studying AI collectives.
   
   Michael Wooldridge's "An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems" is a comprehensive resource on this topic.

5.5 AI and Human Societies:

1. Nick Bostrom's "Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies" considers various scenarios for the development of superintelligent AI, including collective AI systems.
   
   
2. Yoshua Bengio and other AI researchers have discussed the potential for AI to enhance human collective intelligence rather than replace it.

The Times They Are a-Changin

Contrary to hopes and predictions, we are observing how history is rising again from its supposed grave and how utopias are turning into dystopias.

I spontaneously wrote the following lines when our fateful year 2024 was still in its infancy, yet no langer innocent. Those days I for any reason hesitated releasing it to the public. Maybe I feared to have been misguided by Ian Bremmer’s dark vision of things to come. Three more months down the line I found out that “there is an infinite amount of hope in the universe ... but not for us.” (Franz Kafka).

The turn of the year is often an opportunity for me to think a little further back and forward - what has the past year given us, what do we expect from the new year - what changes have the past decades brought about, what promises and threats do the coming decades hold?

And then I read Ian Bremmer’s, President at Eurasia Group. Extremely dire outlook

It’s the annus horribilis,

The Voldemort of years,

The year that must not be spoken,

Welcome to 2024

He a few days later he elaborated a bit more on it (Why 2024 is the Voldemort of years), painting  a picture of year ahead of us such bleak, as if the adverse currents, which had been nourished by forgetfulness, complacency or outright ignorance for several years, if not decades, were now to culminate.

Having been roaming the earth for nearly three quarters of a century, I remember that going back a 60 years Bob Dylan shared a different worldview with us …

Come senators, congressmen, please heed the call

Don't stand in the doorway, don't block up the hall

For he that gets hurt will be he who has stalled

The battle outside ragin'

Will soon shake your windows and rattle your walls

For the times, they are a-changin'

When released in 1964 on the album of the same name, "The Times They Are A-Changin'" captured the spirit of social and political upheaval that defined the 1960s. Becoming one of Bob Dylan's most famous songs, it was serving as an anthem for change and a rallying cry for the civil rights and anti-war movements of the era. 

The early 1960s were a time of significant change in the United States and around the world. The civil rights movement, the rise of the counterculture, and increasing opposition to the Vietnam War were all brewing. Dylan felt the winds of change and was inspired to write about them. 

With the blessing of hindsight, it safe to state, we indeed were and still are experiencing the change – albeit different for those original expectations.

The world is no longer “flat”

In April 5, 2005 Pulitzer Prize-winning writer and New York times columnist, Thomas L. Friedman had published his latest book book “The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century “. By analysing the impact of globalization, primarily in the early 21st century he suggested the world has a more level playing field for commerce in which most competitors, except for labour, have an equal opportunity. 

In this meanwhile seemingly long-gone era Friedman, who was at times called “the voice of liberal America” suggested that countries, companies, and individuals need to remain competitive in a global market. Historical and geographic divisions were less important. The “end of history” with only liberal democracies seemed near. At that point in time the first fissures of that flat world should have been visible already. The geo-political plate tectonics driving the spheres of the major two contenders apart, had started well before that date. 

With a suffocating sanctions regime, decoupling of economies and the weaponization of nearly all non-military power a geo-political rift valley grew since Americas traumatic Nine-eleven-event with the prospect of eventually widening into a new ocean, separating two very distinct and different worlds. 

Switzerland is no longer ‘Switzerland’

Switzerland's traditional stance of neutrality has been a cornerstone of its identity. However, the Ukraine-Russia war has tested these waters, with Switzerland facing pressure to align more closely with Western sanctions and policies.

• Advocates for this shift argue that in the face of clear aggression, neutrality becomes an untenable position. They suggest that Switzerland must evolve with the times and take a stand against blatant violations of international law.
  
  
• Critics, however, maintain that abandoning neutrality undermines Switzerland's unique position and credibility in international diplomacy. They warn that this could drag the nation into conflicts that it has historically avoided.

In any case the result is an increased polarisation.

The Green Party is no longer green

The German Greens, once staunch advocates for pacifism and environmentalism, have faced criticism for their perceived shift in stance upon joining the government. The party's support for military aid in the Ukraine conflict marks a significant departure from its original mission.

• Their leaders argue that the Greens are adapting to the complexities of governing and the realities of a world where security threats cannot be ignored. They claim that the party is demonstrating a mature approach to balancing idealism with the practical need to protect democratic values.
  
  
• On the other hand, party members to a high degree feel betrayed, believing that the party has abandoned its core principles in favour of a participation on political power. They worry that this shift undermines the party's credibility and alienates its base.

While aptly visible here, the Green are not the only traditional part that lost its mission, its purpose its soul.

Technology is no longer neutral but weaponized

Technology, once perceived as a neutral tool for advancement and innovation, has increasingly become weaponized. In the realm of international relations, technological supremacy is not just about economic success but a critical component of national security and power projection.

• Some argue that the militarization of technology is a necessary response to emerging threats and a means to maintain a strategic edge. They suggest that technological superiority can act as a deterrent against aggression.
  
  
• Critics warn that this trend leads to an arms race with potentially devastating consequences. They argue that it diverts resources from peaceful uses of technology and could lead to a more dangerous world.

When fragmentation occurs to the core in an increasingly technology-driven world, separate, completely incompatible worlds emerge that become increasingly alien to one another, with the dangerous side effect of denying each other human dignity.

Free Markets are no longer free

The notion of free markets as open, unbiased platforms for trade is increasingly being questioned. As geopolitical tensions rise, markets are becoming arenas for power plays, shaped more by strategic interests than by supply and demand.

• Proponents of more regulated markets argue that in a world of power politics, leaving markets entirely free is naive. They believe that strategic intervention can protect national interests and prevent hostile powers from gaining undue influence.
  
  
• On the other hand, free-market purists contend that such interventions distort markets, hinder competition, and ultimately harm consumers and economies. They advocate for minimal government interference to preserve market efficiency and innovation.

The press is no longer the Fourth Estate

The press, once revered as the fourth pillar of democracy, is facing a crisis of confidence. Accusations of bias, sensationalism, and capitulation to corporate and political interests have tarnished its reputation.

• Some argue that the media is simply adapting to a changing world. They suggest that in an era of information overload, the press must find new ways to capture attention and remain financially viable.
  
  
• Critics, however, see a more sinister trend. They believe the media has strayed from its watchdog role, becoming a mouthpiece for the powerful and abandoning its duty to inform and empower the public.

Cold War 2.0 is brewing alongside several hot conflicts 

The once unipolar world order, a term popularized by Charles Krauthammer to describe post-Cold War America's dominance, has evolved into a classical power competition. The incumbent world hegemon, the United States, now faces a formidable challenge from a rising China. This contest is not merely about military might or economic prowess but extends deeply into the realm of technology. Microchips, the bedrock of modern digital technology, have become a critical flashpoint in this new cold war.

• Some argue that this competition drives technological innovation, leading to faster advancements and better products. The race to dominate the microchip industry pushes companies and countries to invest heavily in research and development.
  
  
• However, others point out that this rivalry leads to increased tension and the potential for conflict. The reliance on a few suppliers for critical technology creates vulnerabilities and the risk of supply chain disruptions.

Conclusion: From Science Fiction to Reality

Arthur C. Clarke's assertion that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" aptly captures the awe and apprehension surrounding the rapid advancements in technology. As microchips continue to shape our world in ways that once seemed the realm of science fiction, the challenge lies in navigating these developments wisely. 

Balancing innovation with ethical considerations, competition with cooperation, and national interests with global well-being is the tightrope walk of our times. The decisions made today will determine whether technology ultimately serves to uplift humanity or leads it into a new era of conflict and division.

Ian Bremmer, President at Eurasia Group

It’s the annus horribilis,

The Voldemort of years,

The year that must not be spoken,

Welcome to 2024

The “progress” 2024 has made after having lived through more than its 1st third is not serving to lift our mood. Referring to Bob Dylan again it rather supports his dire premonition as obscurely expressed in another of his epic songs "A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall".

I once disclosed, considering myself an optimist in a doomed world, I cling to a kind of desperate opiumism. It is not just to feel better during the years that are left to me, but in order to nourish the strength to take action, not just to have been a passenger on star ship earth but a valuable crew member, contributing to its direction and be the change myself.

There will be political responses

Anticipating the Impacts of AI on Jobs, Culture, and Society

A drag holds a human child in Fantastic Planet (1973)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has finally arrived. 

With the release of ChatGPT3 at the end of 2022, a form of so-called artificial intelligence has become part of the lives of millions of people around the world.

What was once an academic curiosity has now become a dominant mega-topic. The official birth of the AI field is considered to be the legendary Dartmouth Conference in 1956, where John McCarthy coined the term "Artificial Intelligence." Alongside Marvin Minsky, Claude Shannon, and Nathan Rochester, McCarthy organized the conference, thus establishing himself as one of the grandfathers of a development that today stirs the minds of many.

This success was by no means assured. From the Dartmouth Conference to ChatGPT, it was a story of ups and downs, where peaks of minor successes were immediately followed by troughs, the so-called AI winters. After exaggerated expectations that simply could not be met, markets reacted with disappointment, and financing for this esoteric branch of research was cut—leading to a refocus on tangible, achievable tasks.

Now, however, AI has entered the mainstream. It is ubiquitous, dominating investment decisions, celebrated by some as a harbinger of a future of abundance and feared by others as the last invention of humanity before its unstoppable demise.

Once again, we are dealing with exaggerated expectations. Yet, the world of AI experts agrees: there will not be a third AI winter. The genie is out of the bottle and cannot be stopped.

But can we be so sure of this? Could the enormous data hunger for training AI models and/or the horrendous energy demand associated with their use, along with major accidents, simply exaggerated expectations, or other, yet unforeseen events, not again act as a brake and lead to disillusionment?

I consider this possible. But here we are concerned with something else.

"We have reached the threshold of a development that will sustainably change the world in which we work and live."

This statement has been heard frequently in recent weeks and months in one form or another. If we follow this assumption for a moment, with all healthy scepticism towards forecasts, what subsequent effects can we then expect for jobs, culture, and society?

A look at history teaches us that human development proceeds in waves. By no means does it follow a straightforward trend towards more, however defined, "progress." Let us assume for simplicity's sake that the development of the past few years continues in the same direction and speed as before, or even faster. Then AI will indeed sustainably change our lives.

But how?

This is something we need to think about.

This raises a multitude of questions that are not easy, perhaps even impossible, to answer, but whose answers depend on our fate as humanity in its entirety.

Questions such as...

• Are we approaching a time of abundance, as enthusiastic futurists like Peter Diamandis have been predicting for decades? Or do we first lose our jobs, then our purpose in life?

• Will human and machine share work amicably, so that each party does what it is best suited for? Or will AI colleagues soon do everything better than us, and human intervention would only interfere?

• Will a new era of machines dawn, a level higher, more powerful, and more productive than today? Or will machines develop into our new colleagues? Will they, a creation in our image, have consciousness, their own opinions—a will of their own?

• Suppose the development occurs eruptively and quickly in a few epicenters of our planet. Will we find the right solutions for societies in individual countries of this earth and between states for adequate participation in the fruits of this development?
  
  
• Will we have enough time to react to these changes? Do we perhaps even have to anticipate them as alternative scenarios? Or will we, as so often in the past, only notice the societal consequences when they can no longer be denied, and a revolutionary wave demands economic, societal, and thus political changes with disruptive force?

Much about this AI-driven innovation may be new, specific, and quite different than before. Yet, if we want to look into the future, a glance in the rear-view mirror often helps, at past economic waves, often referred to as Kondratiev cycles after their namesake, the Soviet economist Nikolai Kondratiev.

What advice do we receive from a glance at history when we ask it three simple questions?

• What technological innovations in the history of humanity had societal and political effects?
  
  
• What were these effects?
  
  
• How long did it take until these effects became noticeable?

We should be aware that the impact of technical innovations is often overestimated in the short term but tends to be underestimated in the long term.

What does the retrospect teach us?

Throughout human history, there have been numerous technical innovations. The economic effects of the aforementioned 5 Kondratiev cycles are comparatively well studied. There is significantly less consensus about the societal and political consequences. There had also been innovations before the beginning of industrialization that had significant societal and political effects.

Again, three of them I will consider here as examples. They include...

• The printing press
  
  
• The steam engine
  
  
• The internet

The Printing Press and the Explosive Power of Knowledge for All

Johannes Gutenberg

Developed by Johannes Gutenberg in the 15th century, it created the conditions for previously insider knowledge to find widespread dissemination in large quantities.

The effects of the innovation "printing press" were noticeable within decades.

Favoured by a political environment in which the secular power of traditional authorities was weakened in the aftermath of previous, catastrophic plague epidemics, we saw as immediate or indirect consequences far-reaching intellectual and political movements, such as...

• Renaissance,
  
  
• Humanism,
  
  
• Reformation,
  
  
• Enlightenment

This "emergence of man from his self-imposed immaturity," as Immanuel Kant would later call it, had undeniably positive effects, but also side effects that would plunge Central Europe into a catastrophe, the consequences of which were felt for a long time.

The newfound freedom of thought eventually shook divinely perceived social orders. Counterforces were not long in coming. In the fateful 30 years between the Defenestration of Prague and the Peace of Westphalia, Central Europe was largely devastated. This Thirty Years' War reduced the population of Central Europe by about half.

The Steam Engine and the Long Shadow of the Industrial Revolution

James Watt

Linked with the name James Watt, the steam engine was developed in the 18th century. According to conventional doctrine, it thus initiated the industrial revolution, the 1st Kondratiev cycle.

It changed working conditions and economic structures sustainably, leading to a wave of urbanization. Per capita incomes in the USA, for example, doubled during the 19th century. Life expectancy in Great Britain rose from 40 to 48, the literacy rate from 75% to 97%.

These societal changes became apparent within a few generations.

But this time too, the again undeniably positive effects had their clear downsides. The resulting population growth increased the supply of cheap labor, which was consistently exploited. Social inequalities, exploitation, and the alienation of the working class were the result.

In 1867, Karl Marx published Vol. I of his main work "Das Kapital." He thereby created the theoretical foundations for socialism and communism. The causes, however, lay in the societal tensions enabled by an innovation and the political forces thereby unleashed. They caused revolutions, counter-movements, and ideological conflicts that are still palpable today.

The Internet − the Infrastructure for Communication and Interaction

Tim Berners-Lee

Since the 1960s, developed out of a military need and initially used civically in the academic sphere, the internet has triggered a 5th economic cycle according to Kondratiev.

It has profoundly changed the way we communicate, do business, and organize political movements.

The effects became apparent relatively quickly, in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

As of today, it offers almost every citizen access to the world's knowledge, to communication with individuals, interest groups, and companies. More than in the developed world, it has meanwhile enabled several billion people in the still developing world, such as in India or China, to participate in secured financial transactions and interaction with authorities and companies.

The downside, however, is that it is also used for propaganda, fake news, conspiracy theories, and hate tirades. Although these threats to communities, whose basis is reliable information, are as old as humanity, the now available amount of information is new. Our lack of familiarity with conscientious source verification proves to be problematic here. Increasingly, the abundance of information on offer overwhelms the individual citizen.

Thus, the ubiquity of the internet also tempts surveillance and manipulation by friend and foe. What once began as the great and for official bodies uncontrollable free space has meanwhile developed into the most monitored communication medium in the world. States and companies that operate a significant portion of the internet infrastructure have thereby gained enormous power over states, companies, and citizens who only use this infrastructure. As expected, counter-movements are forming here as well. Their influence, however, is not yet foreseeable. The race is still open. We find ourselves in the midst of a breath-taking development.

These innovations show how technology can change social and political structures, often faster than societies can prepare (for them).

What does this mean for the effects of AI?

Since we have been in the age of artificial intelligence for a few years now, I have, out of courtesy, first also asked AI about its own concerns. So what does ChatGPT 4.0 think about this? − Let's give the colleague (unprompted) the floor.

The question was:

If we transfer these experiences to artificial intelligence.

What can we then expect?

The somewhat sobering answer is given below along with my somewhat flippant comments:

When transferring these historical experiences to artificial intelligence (AI), we can expect significant societal and political changes.

⇨ Oh, really?

AI has the potential to reshape labour markets through automation, increase efficiency in many sectors, and fundamentally change the way we process data and make decisions.

⇨ We didn't need to ask ChatGPT for that

The effects could include both positive aspects such as improved quality of life and healthcare as well as challenges such as job losses and data protection issues.

⇨ I would never have thought of that

These changes could become visible relatively quickly, as the technology develops and spreads rapidly.

⇨ That's true. So, which AI are we talking about?

These answers could have been spontaneously provided by a mediocre career politician. Perhaps they could also have been delivered by t some phrase generator. I guess I'll have to, according to Kant again, dare to use my own mind.

ANI, AGI, ASI − AI is not all the same

ANI - AGI − ASI, these three acronyms are commonly used to describe the stages of an expected development of artificial intelligence. This is - counterforces unconsidered - the expected course.

The three stages listed are briefly characterized as follows.

ANI − Artificial Narrow Intelligence

• Models trained for specific tasks, which can already be far superior to current human capabilities in those tasks.

• This is the position where development has arrived here and now. Its influence is already palpable in approaches today but will intensify significantly.

• ANI will sustainably transform the economy and society. We will feel effects, perceived as positive as well as negative, that are comparable to those of the three selected innovations, or may even exceed them.

Even at this stage, a technology impact assessment is an almost impossible task. However, not addressing it would be a culpable omission.

AGI − Artificial General Intelligence

• This is the state popularly referred to as "Singularity." Then machines will reach human level. Since there is no consensus on exactly how to define that, I add "in all intellectual and emotional dimensions".

• Thus, they should have left the level of a (soulless) machine and mutated into a new life form, an act of creation in which we create a being in our image, if that will ever be possible. These beings will have consciousness, must receive rights & will (unfortunately) be similar to us.

• They will be as smart as an average human, but also as stupid. They can then be our partners, assistants, or colleagues on the job − but also autonomous warriors. And of course, they will also take their own further development into their own hands, be able to reproduce independently.

ASI − Artificial Super Intelligence

• An ASI, probably a "being," is by definition far above the level of human intelligence. Since we have no model for such beings, I'd rather skip a further description here.

• It is also completely unclear whether this state is fundamentally achievable. Whether it is even desirable is another philosophical question. Some recognized AI experts and successful book authors think that the open-ended ASI universe can be reached very quickly once we have reached the AGI level. But in the graph above, the innocent term "unknown breakthroughs" stands for this. So, fundamental technical and perhaps even epistemological advances are still to be achieved, whose nature we cannot even guess, before the AGI stage can be reached.

• For decades, prominent AI developers and researchers have been warning that their own work will create this homunculus, which after a Eureka moment "It‘s alive, it’s alive!" will take over world domination and destroy us all or at least treat us as negligently as we treat the wildlife around us today.

• Yes, if these super beings will be socialized in the same way we humans have become over the course of our evolution, then this is a valid option, albeit not a very pleasant one. This horror scenario is of course pure speculation. Perhaps a real superintelligence would also have completely different priorities. Maybe it would even be the salvation from ourselves.

ANI − Tense in the Here and Now

Jobs − Will we all become unemployed?

Let's first hear the voices of others. What do our recognized AI experts have to say on this topic?

Raj Mukherjee

"We've seen it all before. Every technological revolution has led to the loss of jobs. But new jobs will be created, and many new jobs will be created in the course of this AI revolution.."

Raj Mukherjee thus represents the prevailing opinion. According to this rosy future picture, humans and robots will divide the work according to their capabilities: we humans will keep interesting, fulfilling tasks for ourselves. Everything annoyingly boring, repetitive, mechanical remains with the bots.

However, this utopia is spontaneously opposed by three caveats. Because ...

• Even today, AI has a firm place in the creative business.
  
  
• Just for simple tasks, the human is simply still simply the cheaper option.
  
  
• For some "bullshit jobs" one may simply not want to admit that machines can do that too. Here, a human must still "stick his neck out".

Maybe this time, however, the course will take a different direction.

According to an analysis commissioned by the IMF, 40% of jobs worldwide will be "affected" by AI. In developed economies, it is even supposed to be around 60%. Classic industrial jobs will hardly change thereafter through the use of AI.

Academics and office workers in manufacturing, however, will be supported by AI. As a result, fewer of them will be needed. Other corporate tasks can be completely taken over by AI.

Well-founded and painstakingly acquired knowledge through years of study will no longer be a job guarantee. As long as the threshold to AGI is not crossed, human labour will certainly still be needed in many places in our economy and administration. There will be fewer of them than before. On the other hand, some new positions will be created.

But let's assume that AGI will actually be reached at some point, then it will still take a while. But at some point, we will all lose our jobs.

Inequality - It has the potential to tear societies apart

Let's first hear the voices of others. What do our recognized AI experts have to say on this topic?

Sam Altman

"I believe that AI will be the greatest force for economic development. We will see many more people become rich than ever before."

What will become of the rest, I involuntarily ask myself, the "left behinds," how will their live be?

Without far-reaching interventions in our way of life and economic model, the application of artificial intelligence will probably only further intensify the already prevailing trend towards economic inequality. This inequality usually grows in politically and economically calm times.

Without intervention it can take on extreme dimensions and can only be reduced by catastrophically incisive events such as epidemics, wars, or revolutions. In doing so, economic inequality grows within national societies as well as among nations, if they do not fight back with means that are considered unfair by convinced market economists.

Extreme economic inequality can lead to social unrest and economic inefficiency. It has the potential to tear societies apart. As with previous innovations, there will have to be political responses to such technology-induced upheavals.

Unlike in the past, however, we will not have much time to address the challenge. We have not even generally recognized it as a danger yet.

Changes in Culture & Society

"The future is here − it is just not equally distributed" is often quoted from science fiction author William Gibson. That means, if we want to know what it will look like (soon) in our area, we just have to look around. In a few, select avant-garde corners and crannies of our society, we will find material to view for a glimpse into our own future.

Yann LeCun, AI expert at Meta sees AI as the future of communication: "We will constantly talk to these AI assistants. Our entire digital communication will be mediated by AI systems." Will the already difficult communication between people then fall by the wayside? Well, it will inevitably happen less frequently in this scenario. Hopefully, we won't get out of practice.

Scott Adams, the well-known author of the popular Dilbert cartoons, even sees the gender ratio disturbed. From his (male) perspective, men will increasingly turn to low-maintenance digital girlfriends in the future: “The girlfriend Singularity is here. Human women had a good run.“

This may still seem quite far-fetched to us. Nevertheless, our interaction will change. Rather questionable offers in this context already exist. Apparently, we are in for a journey into the unknown.

Another question we will have to deal with is how we will deal with the loss of a profession that fulfils us, makes us proud, from which we derive our self-esteem. Is a life without a mission meaningless? Will decreasing self-esteem due to job loss become a mass phenomenon?

The much-discussed unconditional basic income may become necessary. As long as our social status is job-centered, and just as our self-esteem is defined by it, however, it will not solve the problem of job loss.

In our lives, other values will have to gain importance. Maybe we should look to role models in other, foreign cultures or on the fringes of our own societies, for whom work has never been the centre of life and who have nevertheless been able to conduct a good life.

We will have to redefine the meaning of life.

Outlook on AGI & ASI - What Developments Are Expected?

Here we enter unknown territory. This is the realm of pure speculation. Some well-known AI experts have already undertaken this for me. Let's let four of them have their say.

Elon Musk

"For the first time, we will have something that is smarter than the smartest human. It's hard to say exactly when that will be, but there will come a point when no work will be necessary anymore."

Yuval Noah Harari

"We may be talking about the end of human history - the end of the period dominated by humans.."

Paul Christiano

"I think there is a 10- to 20-percent chance that AI will take over, with many, most people dying."

Geoffrey Hinton

“Humanity is just a temporary phase of evolutionary intelligence.“

Will an Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) deal with humanity as we deal with the wildlife today?

Is it even responsible for the "Great Filter" resulting from the Fermi paradox, which has so far prevented aliens from contacting us (because they have all been turned off by their own AI beforehand).

So exciting philosophical questions arise. Personally, I tend to agree with Kai-Fu Lee, book author, former Google China boss & founder of the start-up 01.AI: "The Singularity is still not our problem".

But we have to deal with the immediate consequences of a broad application of artificial intelligence, with wealth concentrations, possibly mass unemployment, and the loss of a natural self-understanding that was based on one's own creation of values.

If we have indeed reached the threshold of a development that will sustainably change the world in which we work and live, it is now time to think about the consequences for jobs, culture, and society.

As in the wake of the great innovations of the past, there will have to be political responses to the new economic constellations.

Unlike in the past, however, we will not have much time for an appropriate response. And there will be political responses, whether we act now or not. It would therefore be good to think about the "how" now, to at least have the chance of influencing the course of history ahead of us.

Es wird politische Antworten geben

Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen, die wir von der KI auf Jobs, Kultur und Gesellschaft erwarten können.

A drag holds a human child in Fantastic Planet (1973)

Künstliche Intelligenz − Sie ist (endlich) angekommen

Mit der Veröffentlichung von ChatGPT3 ist seit Ende des Jahres 2022 eine Form der der sogenannten künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) Teil des Lebens von Millionen Menschen in weiten Teilen der Welt geworden.

Lange hat es gedauert bis eine zunächst akademische Kuriosität zu einem alles beherrschenden Mega-Thema geworden ist.

Als die offizielle Geburtsstunde des Fachs KI gilt die legendäre Dartmouth-Konferenz im Jahr 1956. Hier prägte John McCarthy den Begriff "Künstliche Intelligenz". Zusammen mit Marvin Minsky, Claude Shannon und Nathan Rochester organisierte McCarthy die Konferenz. Er gilt damit als einer der Großväter einer Entwicklung, die heute die Gemüter vieler Menschen bewegt.

Dieser Erfolg war keineswegs gesichert. Von der Dartmouth Conference bis ChatGPT war es eine Geschichte des Auf und Ab, in der auf Höhen kleiner Erfolge gleich wieder Tiefen folgten, die sogenannten KI-Winter. Nach überzogenen Erwartungen, die schlicht nicht erfüllt werden konnten, reagierten die Märkte enttäuscht. In der Folge wurden die Finanzierungen dieses esoterischen Forschungszweigs gestrichen − man beschäftigte sich wieder mit handfesten, erfüllbaren Aufgaben.

 

Jetzt aber ist die KI im Mainstream angekommen. Sie ist allgegenwärtig, dominiert die Investitionsentscheidungen, wird zum einen als Heilsbringer einer Zukunft des Überflusses gefeiert und zum anderen als letzte Erfindung der Menschheit vor ihrem unaufhaltsamen Untergang gefürchtet.

Wieder haben wir es mit überzogenen Erwartungen zu tun. Die Welt der KI-Experten ist sich aber einig: einen dritten KI-Winter wird es nicht mehr geben. Der Geist ist jetzt aus der Flasche. Er lässt sich nicht mehr stoppen.

Aber können wir uns dessen wirklich so sicher sein? Könnten sich der enorme Datenhunger für das Training der KI-Modelle und / oder der horrende Energiebedarf, der damit, aber auch mit deren Nutzung einhergeht, größere Unfälle, schlicht wiederum überzogene Erwartungen oder andere, noch nicht vorhersehbare Ereignisse, nicht wieder bremsend und desillusionierend auswirken?

Ich halte das für möglich. Aber hier soll es um etwas anderes gehen.

“Wir sind an der Schwelle einer Entwicklung angekommen, die die Welt in der wir arbeiten und leben nachhaltig verändern wird.“

Dieses Statement war in den letzten Wochen und Monaten in dieser oder einer ähnlichen Formulierung schon häufiger zu hören. Wenn wir, bei aller gesunden Skepsis gegenüber Voraussagen, dieser Annahme einmal folgen, welche Folgewirkungen werden sich dann daraus für Jobs, Kultur und Gesellschaft ergeben?

Ein Blick auf die Geschichte lehrt und, dass die menschliche Entwicklung in Wellen verläuft. Keineswegs folgt sie einem gradlinigen Trend zu mehr, wie auch immer definiertem, “Fortschritt“. Nehmen wir hier aber der Einfachheit halber an, die Entwicklung der wenigen letzten Jahre ginge in Richtung und Geschwindigkeit so weiter, wie bisher oder gar noch schneller. Dann wird die KI wird unser Leben tatsächlich nachhaltig verändern.

Aber wie?

Darum sollten wir uns Gedanken machen.

Damit stellt sich eine Vielzahl von Fragen, die zu beantworten nicht leicht, vielleicht sogar unmöglich, ist, von deren Beantwortung jedoch unser Schicksal als Menschheit in ihrer Gänze abhängt.

Fragen wie …

• Steht uns eine Zeit des Überflusses bevor, wie es euphorische Zukunftspropheten wie Peter Diamandis seit Jahrzehnten nicht müde werden, vorherzusagen? Oder verlieren wir erst unsere Arbeit, dann unseren Lebensinhalt?
  
  
• Werden sich Mensch und Maschine die Arbeit gütlich aufteilen, sodass jede Partei das tut, wofür die am besten geeignet ist? Oder können die KI-Kollegen bald alles besser als wir und der menschliche Eingriff würde nur noch stören?
  
  
• Wird eine neues Maschinenzeitalter anbrechen, eine Ebene höher, mächtiger und produktiver als heute? Oder werden sich die Maschinen zu unseren neuen Kollegen weiterentwickeln? Werden sie, eine Schöpfung nach unserem Ebenbild, ein Bewusstsein, eine eigene Meinung − einen Eigensinn haben?
  
  
• Nehmen wir weiter an, die Entwicklung würde eruptiv und schnell in wenigen Epizentren unseres Planeten vor sich gehen. Werden wir für die Gesellschaften in den einzelnen Ländern dieser Erde und zwischen den Staaten die richtigen Lösungen für eine angemessene Teilhabe an den Früchten dieser Entwicklung finden?
  
  
• Werden wir ausreichend Zeit haben, auf diese Veränderungen zu reagieren? Müssen wir sie vielleicht sogar als alternative Szenarien antizipieren? Oder werden wir, wie so oft in der Vergangenheit, die gesellschaftlichen Folgen erst bemerken, wenn sie nicht mehr zu leugnen sind und eine revolutionäre Welle wirtschaftliche, gesellschaftliche und damit politische Änderungen mit disruptiver Gewalt einfordert?

Vieles mag an dieser, von der KI getriebenen, Innovation neu, spezifisch und ganz anders als zuvor sein. Dennoch, wenn wir in die Zukunft schauen wollen, hilft oft bereits ein Blick in den Rückspiegel, auf vergangene wirtschaftliche Wellen. Oft werden diese zyklischen Wirtschaftsentwicklungen nach ihrem Namensgeber, dem sowjetischen Wirtschaftswissenschaftler Nikolai Kondratjew auch als Kondratjew-Zyklen bezeichnet.

Welche Ratschläge erhalten wir bei einem Blick in die Geschichte, wenn wir ihr drei simple Fragen stellen?

• Welche technischen Innovationen in der Geschichte der Menschheit hatten gesellschaftliche und politische Auswirkungen?
  
  
• Welche Auswirkungen waren das?
  
  
• Wie lange hat es jeweils gedauert, bis diese Auswirkungen erkennbar wurden?

Wir sollten uns da bei der Gefahr bewusst sein, dass der Einfluss technischer Innovationen kurzfristig oft überschätzt, langfristig aber tendenziell unterschätzt wird.

Was lehrt uns die Rückschau?

Im Verlauf der Menschheitsgeschichte hat es eine Vielzahl Technischer Innovationen gegeben. Die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen für die bereits erwähnten bisher 5 Kondratjew-Zyklen sind vergleichsweise gut untersucht. Über die gesellschaftlichen und politischen Folgen herrscht deutlich weniger Konsens. Auch hatte es schon vor Beginn der Industrialisierung Innovationen gegeben, die bedeutende gesellschaftliche und politische Auswirkungen hatten.

Wiederum drei von ihnen will ich hier exemplarisch betrachten. Sie umfassen …

• Die Druckerpresse
• Die Dampfmaschine und
• Das Internet

Die Druckerpresse und die Explosivkraft des Wissens für Alle

Johannes Gutenberg

Von Johannes Gutenberg im 15. Jahrhundert entwickelt, schaffte sie die Voraussetzung dafür, dass bisher kleinen Insider-Kreisen vorbehaltenes Wissen in großer Menge eine weite Verbreitung finden konnte.

Die Auswirkungen der Innovation “Druckerpresse“ wurden innerhalb von Jahrzehnten spürbar.

Begünstigt durch ein politisches Umfeld, in dem in der Folge vorausgegangener, katastrophaler Pestepidemien die weltliche Macht traditioneller Autoritäten geschwächt war, sahen wir als unmittelbare oder mittelbare Folgen weitreichende geistige und politische Bewegungen, wie …

• Renaissance,
• Humanismus,
• Reformation,
• Aufklärung

Dieser "Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbst verschuldeten Unmündigkeit",wie es Immanuel Kant später einmal bezeichnen sollte, hatte neben den unbestreitbar positiven Effekten auch Nebenwirkungen, die Mitteleuropa in eine Katastrophe stürzen sollte, deren Folgen noch lange zu spüren waren.

Die neue Gedankenfreiheit rüttelte schließlich an göttlich empfundenen gesellschaftlichen Ordnungen. Gegenkräfte ließen nicht lange auf sich warten. In den schicksalhaften 30 Jahren zwischen Prager Fenstersturz und dem Westfälischen Frieden wurde Mitteleuropa weitgehend verwüstet. Dieser 30-jährige Krieg hat die Bevölkerung Mitteleuropas um etwa die Hälfte reduziert.

Die Dampfmaschine und der lange Schatten der Industriellen Revolution

James Watt

Verbunden mit dem Namen James Watt wurde die Dampfmaschine im 18. Jahrhundert entwickelt. Nach gängiger Lehre leitete sie damit die industrielle Revolution ein, den 1. Kondratjew-Zyklus.

Sie veränderte Arbeitsbedingungen und wirtschaftliche Strukturen nachhaltig, führte zu einer Welle der Urbanisierung. Die pro-Kopf-Einkommen in den USA beispielsweise verdoppelten sich während des 19 Jahrhunderts. Die Lebenserwartung in Großbritannien stieg von 40 auf 48, die Alphabetisierungsrate von 75% auf 97%.

Diese gesellschaftlichen Veränderungen wurden innerhalb weniger Generationen deutlich.

Aber auch diesmal hatten die wiederum unbestreitbar positiven Effekte ihre deutlichen Schattenseiten. Das infolge des Bevölkerungswachstums gestiegene Angebot preiswerter Arbeitskräfte wurde konsequent ausgenutzt. Soziale Ungleichheiten, Ausbeutung und die Entfremdung der Arbeiterklasse waren die Folge.

1867 publizierte Karl Marx Bd. I seines Hauptwerks “Das Kapital“. Er schaffte damit die theoretischen Grundlagen für Sozialismus und Kommunismus. Die Ursachen aber lagen in den durch eine Innovation ermöglichten gesellschaftlichen Spannungen und den dadurch freigesetzten politischen Kräften. Sie bewirkten Revolutionen, Gegenbewegungen und ideologische Konflikte, die noch heute spürbar sind.

Das Internet − die Infrastruktur für Kommunikation und Interaktion

Tim Berners-Lee

Seit den 1960er Jahren aus einem militärischen Bedarf heraus entwickelt und zivil zunächst im akademischen Bereich verwendet, hat das Internet nach Kondratjew einen 5. wirtschaftlichen Zyklus ausgelöst.

Es hat die Art und Weise, wie wir kommunizieren, Geschäfte machen und politische Bewegungen organisieren, tiefgreifend verändert.

Die Auswirkungen wurden relativ schnell, in den späten 1990er und frühen 2000er Jahren, offensichtlich.

Per heute bietet es fast jedem Bürger den Zugang zum Wissen der Welt, zur Kommunikation mit Einzelpersonen, Interessengruppen und Unternehmen. Mehr noch als in der entwickelten Welt, hat es inzwischen einigen Milliarden Menschen in der sich noch entwickelnden Welt, wie in Indien oder China, die Teilnahme an gesicherten finanziellen Transaktionen und an der Interaktion mit Behörden und Unternehmen ermöglicht.

Die Kehrseite aber ist, dass es auch für Propaganda, Fake-News, Verschwörungstheorien, Hasstiraden verwendet wird. Zwar sind diese Bedrohungen für Gemeinwesen, deren Grundlage verlässliche Informationen sind, so alt wie die Menschheit. Neu aber ist die jetzt verfügbare Informationsmenge. Unsere mangelnde Vertrautheit mit einer gewissenhaften Quellenprüfung erweist sich hier als problematisch. Zunehmend überfordert die Fülle des Informationsangebots den einzelnen Bürger.

So reizt auch die Allgegenwart des Internets zur Überwachung und zur Manipulation durch Freund und Feind. Was einmal als der große und für offizielle Stellen nicht kontrollierbarer Freiraum begann, hat sich inzwischen zum bestüberwachten Kommunikations-Medium der Welt entwickelt. Staaten und Unternehmen, die einen nennenswerten Anteil der Internet-Infrastruktur betreiben haben dadurch eine enorme Macht über Staaten, Unternehmen und Bürger erhalten, die diese Infrastruktur nur nutzen. Wie zu erwarten, formieren sich auch hier wieder Gegenbewegungen. Deren Einfluss ist jedoch noch nicht absehbar. Das Rennen ist noch offen. Wir befinden uns mitten im Zentrum einer atemberaubenden Entwicklung.

Diese Innovationen zeigen, wie Technologie die sozialen und politischen Strukturen verändern kann, oft schneller, als Gesellschaften sich darauf vorbereiten (können).

Was bedeutet das für die Auswirkungen der KI?

Da wir uns bereits seit wenigen Jahren im Zeitalter der künstlichen Intelligenz befinden, habe ich anstandshalber zunächst auch die KI nach der Sicht auf ihre eigenen Belange befragt. Was also meint ChatGPT 4.0 dazu? − Geben wir dem Kollegen (ungeprompted) das Wort.

Die Frage war:

Wenn wir diese Erfahrungen auf die künstliche Intelligenz übertragen.
Was haben wir dann zu erwarten?

Die etwas ernüchternde Antwort ist im Folgenden zusammen mit meinen etwas flapsigen Kommentaren wiedergegeben:

• Beim Übertragen dieser historischen Erfahrungen auf die künstliche Intelligenz (KI) können wir bedeutende gesellschaftliche und politische Veränderungen erwarten.

⇨ Ach, nee?

• KI hat das Potenzial, Arbeitsmärkte durch Automatisierung umzugestalten, die Effizienz in vielen Sektoren zu steigern und die Art und Weise, wie wir Daten verarbeiten und Entscheidungen treffen, grundlegend zu verändern.

⇨ Dafür müssen wir nicht ChatGPT befragen

• Die Auswirkungen könnten sowohl positive Aspekte wie verbesserte Lebensqualität und Gesundheitsversorgung als auch Herausforderungen wie Arbeitsplatzverluste und Datenschutzfragen umfassen.

⇨ Darauf wäre ich ja nie gekommen

• Diese Veränderungen könnten relativ schnell sichtbar werden, da die Technologie sich rasch entwickelt und verbreitet.

⇨ Das stimmt wohl. Also, welche KI meinen wir denn nun?

Diese Antworten hätten wir auch spontan aus dem Mund eine mittelmäßigen Karrierepolitikers erhalten können. Vielleicht hätte sie auch der Lasch-O-Mat oder irgendein anderer Phrasengenerator liefern können. Da muss ich wohl, wieder frei nach Kant, den Mut haben, mich meines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen.

ANI, AGI, ASI − KI ist nicht gleich KI

ANI - AGI − ASI, mit diesen drei Akronymen werden gern die Stufen einer erwarteten Entwicklung der künstlichen Intelligenz beschrieben. Dabei wird - Gegenkräfte unberücksichtigt - der folgende Verlauf erwartet.

Die drei aufgeführten Stufen seien im Folgenden kurz charakterisiert.

ANI − Artificial Narrow Intelligence

• Auf spezifische Aufgaben hin trainierte Modelle, die darin aktuellen menschlichen Fähigkeiten bereits weit überlegen sein können.
  
  
• Das ist die Position auf der die Entwicklung hier und jetzt angekommen ist. Ihr Einfluss wird bereits heute in Ansätzen spürbar, wird sich aber noch deutlich verstärken.
  
  
• ANI wird Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft nachhaltig transformieren. Wir werden positiv wie negativ empfundene Wirkungen spüren, die denen der drei ausgewählten Innovationen gleichkommen, oder sie sogar noch übersteigen werden.

Schon auf dieser Stufe ist eine Technologiefolgenabschätzung eine fast unmögliche Aufgabe. Sie deswegen nicht anzugehen aber wäre ein sträfliches Versäumnis.

AGI − Artificial General Intelligence

• Das ist der Zustand der populär als “Singularität“ bezeichnet wird. Dann werden Maschinen menschliches Niveau erreichen. Da kein Konsens darüber besteht, wie das genau zu definieren ist, füge ich hinzu "in allen intellektuellen und emotionalen Dimensionen".
  
  
• Damit sollten sie das Niveau einer (seelenlosen) Maschine verlassen haben und zu einer neuen Lebensform mutiert sein, ein Schöpfungsakt also, bei dem wir ein Wesen nach unserem Ebenbild schaffen werden, falls das jemals möglich sein wird. Diese Wesen werden Bewusstsein haben, Rechte erhalten müssen & uns (leider) ähnlich sein.
  
  
• Sie werden genauso klug sein wir ein durchschnittlicher Mensch, aber auch genauso dumm. Sie können dann unsere Partner sein, Assistenten oder Kollegen im Job − aber auch autonome Krieger. Und natürlich werden sie ihre eigene Weiterentwicklung auch selbst in die Hand nehmen, sich eigenständig reproduzieren können.

ASI − Artificial Super Intelligence

• Eine ASI, vermutlich ein “Wesen“, steht per Definition weit über dem Niveau der menschlichen Intelligenz. Da wir kein Vorbild für solche Wesen haben, verzichte ich hier lieber auf eine weitere Beschreibung.
  
  
• Völlig unklar ist auch, ob dieser Zustand grundsätzlich erreichbar ist. Ob er überhaupt wünschenswert ist, ist eine andere philosophische Frage. Einige anerkannte KI-Experten und erfolgreiche Buchautoren meinen, dass das nach oben offene ASI-Universum sehr schnell erreicht werden kann, sobald wir einmal auf dem AGI-Niveau angekommen sein werden. Dafür steht aber in der obigen Graphik der unschuldige Begriff "unknown breakthroughs". Es sind also noch fundamentale technische und vielleicht auch erkenntnistheoretische Fortschritte zu erreichen, deren Natur wir nicht einmal erahnen können, bevor überhaupt die AGI-Stufe erreicht werden kann.
  
  
• Seit Jahrzehnten warnen prominente KI-Entwickler und Forscher davor, dass ihre eigenen Arbeiten diesen Homunkulus schaffen, der nach einem Heureka-Moment “It‘s alive, it’s alive!“ die Weltherrschaft übernehmen und uns alle vernichten oder zumindest derart nachlässig behandeln könnte, wie wir heute die uns umgebende Tierwelt der Wildnis.
  
  Ja, wenn diese Superwesen in der gleichen Weise sozialisiert sein werden, wie wir Menschen es im Verlauf unserer Evolution geworden sind, dann ist das eine valide Option, wenngleich keine sehr angenehme. Dieses Schreckensszenario ist natürlich reine Spekulation. Möglicherweise hat eine echte Superintelligenz aber auch ganz andere Prioritäten, Vielleicht wäre sie sogar die Rettung vor uns selbst.

ANI − Angespannt im Hier und Jetzt

Jobs − Werden wir alle arbeitslos werden?

Hören wir zunächst die Stimmen der anderen. Was sagen unsere anerkannten KI-Experten zu diesem Thema?

Raj Mukherjee

"Wir hatten es alles schon einmal. Jede technologische Revolution hat zum Verlust von Arbeitsplätzen geführt. Aber es entstehen neue Arbeitsplätze, und im Rahmen dieser KI-Revolution werden viele neue Arbeitsplätze entstehen."

Raj Mukherjee vertritt damit die allgemein vorherrschende Meinung. Nach diesem rosigen Zukunftsbild werden sich Menschen und Robots die Arbeit nach ihren Fähigkeiten aufteilen: interessante, erfüllende Aufgaben behalten wir Menschen uns vor. Alles ätzend Langweilige, Repetitive, Mechanische verbleibt bei den Bots.

Dieser Utopie sind allerdings spontan drei Caveats entgegen zu halten. Denn …

• Schon heute hat die KI einen festen Platz in der Kreativ-Szene.
  
  
• Gerade für einfache Aufgaben ist der Mensch einfach noch billiger zu haben.
  
  
• Bei einigen “Bullshit Jobs“ mag man sich schlicht nicht eingestehen, dass das auch Maschinen leisten können. Hier muss noch ein Mensch “seinen Kopf hinhalten“.

Vielleicht wird die Entwicklung diesmal aber auch anders verlaufen.

Nach einer Analyse im Auftrag des IWF werden weltweit 40% der Jobs von KI “betroffen“ sein. In entwickelten Wirtschaften sollen es sogar rund 60% sein. Klassische Industriejobs werden sich danach durch den Einsatz von KI kaum ändern.

Akademiker und Büro-Angestellte im verarbeitenden Gewerbe aber werden von KI unterstützt werden. Dadurch werden weniger von ihnen benötigt werden. Andere Unternehmensaufgaben können komplett von KI übernommen werden.

Fundiertes und über jahrelanges Studium mühsam erworbenes Wissen ist dann keine Job-Garantie mehr. Solange die Schwelle zur AGI nicht überschritten wird, werden sicherlich an vielen Stellen unserer Wirtschaft und Verwaltung noch menschliche Arbeitskräfte benötigt werden. Es werden weniger sein als bisher. Dafür werden andererseits einige neue Stellen entstehen.

Nehmen wir aber an, dass AGI tatsächlich irgendwann einmal erreicht wird, dann wird es zwar noch etwas dauern. Aber irgendwann sind wir dann alle unsere Jobs los.

Inequality - Sie hat das Potential Gesellschaften zu sprengen

Hören wir zunächst die Stimmen der anderen. Was sagen unsere anerkannten KI-Experten zu diesem Thema?

Sam Altman

"Ich glaube, dass KI die größte Kraft für die wirtschaftliche Entfaltung sein wird. Wir werden viel mehr Menschen reich werden sehen, als je zuvor."

Was wird aus den Anderen, stellt sich mir unwillkürlich die Frage, die “left behinds“, wie werden sie leben?

Ohne weitreichende Eingriffe in unser Lebens- und Wirtschaftsmodell wird die Anwendung der künstlichen Intelligenz vermutlich den ohnehin vorherrschenden Trend zu wirtschaftlicher Ungleichheit (Inequality) noch verstärken. Diese Ungleichheit wächst üblicherweise in politisch und wirtschaftlich ruhigen Zeiten an.

Sie kann ohne Intervention extreme Ausmaße annehmen und nur durch katastrophal einschneidende Ereignisse wie Seuchen, Kriege oder Revolutionen wieder reduziert werden. Dabei wächst die wirtschaftliche Ungleichheit innerhalb nationaler Gesellschaften wie auch unter den Nationen, wenn diese nicht mit Mitteln dagegen ankämpfen, die von überzeugten Markwirtschaftlern als unfair empfunden werden.

Extreme wirtschaftlicher Ungleichheit kann zu sozialen Unruhen und wirtschaftlicher Ineffizienz führen. Sie hat das Potential Gesellschaften zu sprengen. Wie bei früheren Innovationen wird es politische Antworten auf solche technik-induzierten Verwerfungen geben müssen.

Im Unterschied zu früher wird uns allerdings wenig Zeit zur Verfügung stehen, die Herausforderung zu adressieren. Wir haben sie noch nicht einmal allgemein als Gefahr erkannt.

Veränderungen in Kultur & Gesellschaft

"The future is here − it is just not equally distributed" wird der Science Fiction Autor William Gibson gerne zitiert. Das heißt, wenn wir wissen wollen, wie es in (naher) Zukunft bei uns aussehen wird, müssen wir uns nur umsehen. In einigen, wenigen avantgardistischen Ecken und Winkeln unserer Gesellschaft werden wir fündig werden und Anschauungsmaterial für einen Blick in unsere eigene Zukunft entdecken.

Yann LeCun, KI-Experte bei Meta sieht in der KI die Zukunft der Kommunikation: "Wir werden ständig mit diesen KI-Assistenten sprechen. Unsere gesamte digitale Kommunikation wird durch KI-Systeme vermittelt werden." Bleibt dann die ohnehin schon schwierige Kommunikation zwischen Menschen dabei auf der Strecke? Nun, sie wird in diesem Szenario zwangsläufig seltener stattfinden. Hoffentlich kommen wir dann nicht aus der Übung.

Scott Adams, der bekannte Autor der beliebten Dilbert-Cartoons sieht gar das Geschlechterverhältnis gestört. Aus seiner (männlichen) Perspektive werden sich Männer in Zukunft eher pflegeleichten digitalen Freundinnen zuwenden: “The girlfriend Singularity is here. Human women had a good run.“

Das mag uns noch reichlich weit hergeholt erscheinen. Dennoch unsere Interaktion wird sich verändern. Eher fragwürdige Angebote in diesem Kontext gibt es bereits. Offenbar steht uns eine Reise ins Unbekannte bevor.

Eine weitere Frage, mit der wir uns beschäftigen müssen ist die wie wir mit dem Verlust eines Berufs umgehen werden, der uns ausfüllt, stolz macht, aus dem wir unser Selbstwertgefühl beziehen. Ist ein Leben ohne Aufgabe sinnlos? Wird sinkender Selbstwert durch Job-Verlust zu einem Massenphänomen werden?

Das vieldiskutierte bedingungslose Grundeinkommen wird möglicherweise notwendig werden. Solange unsere gesellschaftliche Stellung aber berufszentriert ist, und ebenso wie unser Selbstwert darüber definiert wird, wird es das Problem des Jobverlusts jedoch nicht lösen.

In unserem Leben werden andere Werte Bedeutung erlangen müssen. Vielleicht sollten wir uns nach Existenzen in anderen, fremden Kulturen oder am Rande unserer eigenen Gesellschaften umsehen, für die Arbeit nie der Lebensmittelpunkt war und die dennoch in der Lage waren ein gutes Leben zu führen.

Wir werden den Sinn des Lebens neu definieren müssen.

Ausblick auf AGI & ASI - Welche Entwicklungen werden erwartet?

Hier betreten wir unbekanntes Terrain. Es beginnt das Gebiet der puren Spekulation. Diese haben bereits einige namhafte KI-Experten für mich unternommen. Lassen wir einmal vier von Ihnen zu Wort kommen.

Elon Musk

"Wir werden zum ersten Mal etwas haben, das intelligenter ist als der intelligenteste Mensch. Es ist schwer zu sagen, wann genau das sein wird, aber es wird ein Punkt kommen, an dem keine Arbeit mehr nötig ist."

Yuval Noah Harari

"Möglicherweise sprechen wir über das Ende der menschlichen Geschichte - das Ende der vom Menschen beherrschten Periode."

Paul Christiano

"Ich denke, es besteht eine 10- bis 20-prozentige Chance, dass die KI die Macht übernimmt, wobei viele, die meisten Menschen sterben werden."

Geoffrey Hinton

“Die Menschheit ist nur eine vorübergehende Phase der evolutionären Intelligenz.“

Wird eine Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) mit der Menschheit verfahren, wie wir heute mit der Tierwelt?

Ist sie gar für den aus dem Fermi-Paradox resultierenden "Großen Filter" verantwortlich, der bisher verhindert hat, dass Außerirdische mit uns in Kontakt traten (weil sie allesamt von ihrer eigenen KI bereits vorher ausgeschaltet worden sind).

Es stellen sich also spannende philosophische Fragen. Persönlich halte ich es eher mit Kai-Fu Lee, Buchautor, Ex-Google China Chef & Gründer des Start-ups 01.AI: "Die Singularität ist noch lange nicht unser Problem".

Aber wir müssen uns mit den unmittelbaren Folgen eines breiten Einsatzes künstlicher Intelligenz befassen, mit Vermögenskonzentrationen, möglicherweise Massenarbeitslosigkeit und mit dem Verlust eines natürlichen Selbstverständnisses, dass auf dem eigenen Schaffen von Werten beruhte.

Wenn wir tatsächlich an der Schwelle einer Entwicklung angekommen sind, die die Welt in der wir arbeiten und leben nachhaltig verändern wird, ist es jetzt an der Zeit sich Gedanken um die Folgen für Jobs, Kultur und Gesellschaft zu machen.

Wie im Kielwasser der großen Innovationen der Vergangenheit wird es politische Antworten auf die neuen wirtschaftlichen Konstellationen geben müssen.

Anders als früher wird uns allerdings nicht viel Zeit für eine angemessene Reaktion bleiben. Und es wird politische Antworten geben, ob wir jetzt handeln oder nicht. Es wäre daher gut, sich jetzt über das "wie" Gedanken zu machen, um wenigstens die Chance einer Steuerung der Entwicklung zu haben.