AI Will Replace Humans

For decades upon centuries we have relinquished ourselves from the playful idea that robots are here to replace us. Every time we doubt its potential; we end up being disproven by its superiority.

Not only are we seeing AI gradually becoming more and more powerful in terms of research, but we are also seeing more and more automation in factories — which suggest a trajectory towards replacement. Humans still provide an important building block when it comes to adaptation & self-awareness, but for how long?

The distinction between automation and adaptation

Initially robots were pre-built water streams for electricity to pass through, all controlled rigorously by human intervention: “When X is this do Y that”- is always the output. The hardware design is the same, but the software has seen a change.

Today an effective AI is more oriented towards probability rather than rigorousness. The change of design suggests that the machine will have a stronger sense of adaptability — which also leviates certainty from the equation: It opens up the possibility for the AI to pursue unintended actions, mistakes; likewise to humans — the removal of the rigorous aspect opens up a door of endless possibilities, both good and bad.

A machine can (And at some point will) obviously however combine the rigorous and impreciseness states of being to fit its own agenda- which puts it a step closer towards achieving singularity. This gives machines a powerful edge that humans cannot necessarily combat with. If a machine gains self-consciousness then it’ll be able to re-program itself just how humans can do through change of habit. We humans have proven that we can set different goals which computers cannot do very easily today.

The creative aspect

Another point of criticism that Artificial intelligence usually receives is that they are considered to be the inverse of humans when it comes to the creative atmosphere: Machines are water streams; humans are magical beasts whose qualities apparently cannot be replicated; our strength is based on combining what seems to be irrelevant ideas into something tangible & useful; in other words: we can draw a connection between multiple objects, for instance: water, tree and gravity and create a bridge. Apparently this is exclusive to humans, but is it really?

The main proposition I’m here to convey is that robots are perfectly able to reconcile two data points into a new idea just like we humans do. There is nothing exclusive to the brain other than complexity based on millions of years of mutation- which remains a competency that already has been beaten on many fronts. While we don’t know much on how the human brain works — The artificial version has already proven its creative capabilities when beating the best chess and go players, ending up being the teacher.

What does AI mean for the future?

It seems that robots can, and will be the most important development of the 21st Century. The underestimation towards it leaves nothing but ignorance behind. AI can either empower us or destroy us. The empowerment part could lead to repetitive tasks being a thing in the past, while we can focus on the creative aspect of creating. Imagine being able to direct a movie without actors: All you would need is a human interface and an idea, similar to how a phone today could make change your trajectory dramatically on social media platforms.

Without having AI empowering us we’ll face doom in countless or more deteriorating ways. We likely only have a few hundred years left on this planet and continuing science as it is will not be good enough in terms of the challenges we’ll face. AI will accelerate our scientific knowledge of the world and solutions like Neuralink could ensure the relevancy of the human kind.

Where is AI today?

AI is still limited to narrow tasks, even though some may portray it as otherwise having a generalized form of intelligence. We’re not there yet, and there may be decades ahead. An AI is adept enough today to recognize faces — but yet limited with that piece of information. It has no knowledge of the world which limits it to be under our control.

With Meta Learning being a key research subject, it still is limited to very basic tasks. The knowledge a human brain can contain is absurd, not because of our actual capacity — but because of how we filter out irrelevant ideas. Savants struggle with this because their left hemisphere doesn’t operate as designed, which leads them to being extraordinarily sufficient at narrow tasks just like machines, but when it comes to adapting to new environments, savants end up being very dependent on others.

Machines and savants are similar in the spectrum of completing narrow tasks, which suggests a filter system is needed. This filter system is likely associated with intelligence, as it cuts off 99% of the noise around us and only connects key ideas. Nobody truly knows yet how our own intelligence works, so emulating it artificially has slowed down AI-research.

Why do we even need AI?

Some might question why we even need AI if it just carries so much risk. The problem it solves can be identified with ourselves.

Humans are really poor at taking unbiased decisions. We are also limited in terms of performance. Although there have been initiatives trying to improve us on that front — we still aren’t fit enough to take responsibilities ourselves. Our planet is slowly dying and we need to accelerate progression, which won’t happen on such a linear trajectory based on stacking minds instead of improving them. Robots will empower us one way or another, which cannot be taken for granted. We’re already seeing Machine Learning algorithms today improving our life quality, and more of that is yet to come.

Future roadblocks ahead

Getting to a utopian dream requires sacrifices. The most intricate issue solving is making sure that the AI behaves according to our standards. How can you convince something superior that you matter? How much does ants matter to humans? The answer probably lies to be found when we figure out how intelligent something actually can become.

Actually teaching robots rules is a lot more complicated than some might think. Everything we experience is subjective exclusively to us; we do not have an objective way of reasoning with most things, and why would robots be any different? A robot with a different lens for a camera might say that a ball is purple, while another one might state it’s blue.

Overall, people have coincidentally also been speculating on machines, it has often resolved around the idea that robots don’t have feelings; another viewpoint, potentially biased in favor of humans, suggesting that AI is just an interface for us to interact with. if this is the case, then how come machines already beat us at any given task we provide them with (Given they’re provided adequate amounts of training)?

The Yogis believe that all matter has consciousness, more or less complicated in its own shape or form — but is still based on a linear scale with matter as the input. Knowing that quantum theory is based on human intervention, kind of suggest that robots technically could partake in living just as we humans do.

Conclusion

Robots are taking over the world whether we want it or not, we’ve already seen it gradually happen through automation. We can and have to do our best to adapt it to fit our worldview as best we can, because if it adapts to us, then who knows what will happen. Robots may end up living next to us at some point, and there might be no stopping it. One thing is for sure though: We cannot live without the competency it brings to the table.