{"id":34329,"date":"2023-04-25T17:04:41","date_gmt":"2023-04-25T16:04:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digileaders.com\/?p=34329"},"modified":"2023-07-19T13:19:26","modified_gmt":"2023-07-19T12:19:26","slug":"to-pause-or-to-push-on-the-ai-dilemma-that-will-shape-our-digital-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/digileaders.com\/to-pause-or-to-push-on-the-ai-dilemma-that-will-shape-our-digital-future\/","title":{"rendered":"To pause or to push on: The AI dilemma that will shape our digital future"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Sometimes it feels like the world turns very slowly. Then, suddenly there is a major shift that has immediate impact and changes our view of the world in fundamental ways. For many people, that is what we have experienced over the past few months.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The release of Open AI\u2019s\u00a0ChatGPT<\/a>\u00a0in November 2022, swiftly followed by Google\u2019s\u00a0Bard<\/a>\u00a0and others, a distant view of an AI-driven world suddenly seems much, much closer. Based on Large Language Models (LLMs) such as\u00a0GPT-4<\/a>\u00a0with billions of parameters, these readily accessible tools have sparked a flurry of applications that make use of neural networks to generate text and images for\u00a0a wide set of situations<\/a>. Supported by an easy to use interface, well-crafted APIs, and a low (or free) cost model, it is not surprising that\u00a0they attracted a million users in only 5 days<\/a>. Consequently, it is impossible to visit a news website, open a journal, or attend a conference without hearing about yet another way that ChatGPT will change the way we work today. While only a few months old,\u00a0a Statistica survey<\/a>\u00a0estimates that over 40% of the adult US population is already aware of ChatGPT.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But perhaps more importantly, it feels like we\u2019ve reached a critical point in the digital transformation journey being pursued by many organizations. Beyond the usual focus on introducing new technology to digitize current practice, the discussions have turned away from a scorecard of applications that will be disrupted by this new wave of AI-based solution, and toward a deeper conversation on the implications and impact this will have on how we see our digital future.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

As these discussions develop, questions are coming to the surface that challenge the current readiness of governance and legal frameworks for AI, dispute the dominant role of Big Tech in controlling key elements of AI, and question the breakneck pace at which AI is disrupting business and society. We are undoubtedly at a crucial point were addressing concerns about \u201chow\u201d to deliver AI are being subsumed by the need to ask \u201cwhy\u201d and \u201cwhen\u201d.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Slow, slow, quick, quick, slow<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the recent\u00a0calls for a slowdown<\/a>\u00a0in the application of AI to allow time for reflection. In an open letter published at the end of March 2023 and signed by over 25,000 people (including several big names<\/a>\u00a0such as Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak), they requested \u201call AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4\u201d. They decry the lack of planning and management behind the launch of products such as ChatGPT, and declare that \u201cpowerful AI systems should be developed only once we are confident that their effects will be positive and their risks will be manageable\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

What is basis for this request? Is it desirable or achievable? In essence, while some people welcome the recent advances in AI as \u201cthe end of the beginning\u201d phase of digital transformation, those behind the call for an AI pause are more inclined to highlight that it may well be \u201cthe beginning of the end\u201d for humanity without appropriate guardrails in place. They worry that we are entering a time when the ideals and safeguards for AI are being trampled under a headlong rush toward exploitation of human rights, excessive commercialization, and the realization of what\u00a0Shoshana Zuboff refers to as \u201csurveillance capitalism\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The case for and against this slowdown has become an important litmus test for expanding our understanding of digital transformation and its importance to our future. Hence, it is essential to spend a moment to review the main arguments on each side of this debate.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Why we need to pause<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
\n

TL;DR \u2013 Recent AI breakthroughs have overwhelmed organizations and institutions. Fair and equitable use of AI should be seen as a right available to all. Without a pause to reflect, we are exposed to fundamental weaknesses in governance, legal, and ethical frameworks that must be addressed now.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Perhaps just as significantly as the hopes it raises, the announcement of ChatGPT reminded many people that the rapid availability of such tools will forcing organizations and individuals to address challenges that they may well be ill prepared to address.\u00a0\u00a0Beyond automation and intelligent decision making, LLM-based AI systems are capable of generating vast amounts of information that is not only indistinguishable from human-generated materials, it is also intended to fool people that it comes from a human source. Furthermore, the intelligence used by such systems is limited in scope, often unverified, and subject to manipulation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Consider, for example, the implications of a sophisticated AI tool that has no concept of right or wrong. Ask it a question and it responds with an answer that is plausible and believable. However, it may also be incomplete, misleading, or simply false. Those already making use of ChatGPT\u00a0report that its responses are \u201cdangerously creative\u201d<\/a>. That is, its creativity knows no bounds. It certainly has no limits on whether its answers are true or false.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This can have disturbing results.\u00a0Cassie Kozyrkov<\/a>, Chief Decision Scientist at Google, calls ChatGPT \u201cthe ultimate bullshitter\u201d. It provides seemingly correct answers to anything and everything.\u00a0\u00a0But without a filter on what it says, and incapable of determining what is true and what is not. It is dangerous precisely because it has no interest in ensuring the validity of its responses.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Furthermore, ChatGPT is widely available at zero cost. This makes it very attractive across many domains. So much so that it had\u00a0over one million users sign up<\/a>\u00a0in less than a week. Its potential uses appear to be never ending. But they also bring with them some troubling questions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Imagine the implications if every student writing an essay can use ChatGPT to generate the text. Every company producing software can deploy ChatGPT to create its code. Every social media channel is clogged with responses created by ChatGPT. And so on. What will this do to many of our knowledge-based professions? What are the implications for intellectually property and liability in a world where we cannot distinguish how information is generated? How will we evaluate the value and validity of AI generated responses? Will wide availability of AI-generated responses destabilize many of our existing systems? These and many other questions are left hanging in the air.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

It is with this in mind that Paul Kedrosky, an economist and MIT fellow,\u00a0refers to ChatGPT<\/a>\u00a0as \u201ca virus that has been released into the wild\u201d. He believes that most organizations are completely unprepared for the impact of ChatGPT. He sees its broad release without restrictions as reckless and has opened a pandoras box that should not have been opened. With the release of ChatGPT we are now beginning to realize just how much that is still to be debated about the future of our digital world.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The\u00a0latest 2023 AI Index<\/a>\u00a0from Stanford University takes this argument one step further. It raises the concern that decisions about how to deploy the latest AI technology and to mitigate are in the hands of a few Big Tech companies. Yet, as their influence grows, they have been seen to\u00a0cut their AI safety and ethics teams<\/a>. Several leading figures in AI\u00a0have highlighted the challenges that this brings<\/a>\u00a0to AI\u2019s future and have called for more focus and investment to govern the use of AI.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In such circumstances, those requesting a pause see the unmanaged release of more and more sophisticated AI systems as irresponsible at best, and dangerous at worst. Cooperative agreements and increased focus are required to reduce potential AI harms that are already having significant negative impacts, but may well seen be out of control.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Why we need to press on<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
\n

TL;DR \u2013 The AI genie is out of the bottle and no-one can put it back. To attempt to do so would not only delay technological advances that could be of broad benefit, it will also harm the geo-political balance among countries and institutions with very different visions of our digital future.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In some people\u2019s eyes, we\u2019re in the middle of a global\u00a0AI race for supremacy<\/a>, and at the moment China may well be in\u00a0a dominant position<\/a>. At least two elements appear to be critical: The availability of large quantities of high speed processors (chips); and the building of high quality large data sets and models to train AI.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

As the world becomes more deeply engaged in the adoption of digital technologies, attention has turned to who produces the most advanced chips at the core of the systems that now are essential to how we function and essential to AI advances in commerce, infrastructure, defence, government, and so on. Naturally, the super powers of the USA and China are at the forefront of these concerns and have placed technology investments at the top of their agendas. So much so that\u00a0President Xi Jinping recently declared<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cTechnological innovation has become the main battleground of the global playing field, and competition for tech dominance will grow unprecedentedly fierce.\u201d This prediction is undoubtedly playing out today.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In addition,\u00a0it is widely reported<\/a>\u00a0that China is applying AI technology very broadly across multiple domains in a race to reboot its economy and control its more than 1.5 billion citizens. Perhaps most prominent has been\u00a0the use of AI to power widescale surveillance<\/a>\u00a0within and outside of China. Using\u00a0a variety of AI tools and techniques<\/a>, Chinese companies and government agencies are collecting information, sharing data across different organizations, and identifying individuals in different contexts. While much of the focus for the use of these approaches is internal to China to support its goal of maintaining governance over its citizens, the adaptation of these skills for commercial and political benefit\u00a0has been highlighted in several reports<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

However, China is not alone in understanding the importance of leadership in AI and more broadly in controlling our digital future. The struggle for dominance of our digital infrastructure is a theme at the heart of\u00a0a recent book by Dame Wendy Hall and Keiron O\u2019Hara<\/a>. They describe the developments in AI and at the core of the internet as alternative visions of a future digital society embodied in the values, structures, and operating models we see in four distinct versions of our digital future:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n