The Theory of Aivolution – From Apes To AI.
Apes would be scared to turn into humans. Humans would be scared to turn into AI machines.
Opposable thumbs helped us build machines.
An AI developer is now creating other machines.
The first thing you ought to do when reading this is not to be defensive (for some, that’s not going to be easy.) It’s difficult because the picture above triggers an impulse in our genetic construction. You see a tiger in the street, and all those triggers (fear of death, more or less) turn on, and your adrenaline levels spike.
AI replacing humans won’t happen in an instant. But like any change, time can do wonders for it.
Nuclear bombs that could end mankind? Outrageous thought, yet nine countries have such bombs.
We got used to it, and most of us don’t think of it when we’re sleeping. We dream of unicorns instead.
Should a human or an AI do this?
The question that will continue to be asked for the next twenty years is, “Should a human or an AI do this?”
It’s not about the answers right now. It’s like a company’s stock performance. Let me elaborate.
If we’re talking about movies, for example, do you prefer human-generated content or AI-generated content? You probably haven’t heard or seen any AI-generated movies, but are you open to the idea? Deloitte asked Generation Z this question.
You see, whether or not AI-generated content is all over the internet does not depend on your opinion. It depends on the opinion of your great-grandchildren. So the simple logical answer to the question is, “If AI-generated content is as good, then it’ll dominate.”
Is AI-generated content as good as human-generated content? It’s not. But there’s a catch.
If, in the year 2000, human content was 99% better than AI content.
If, in the year 2015, human content was 90% better than AI content.
If, in the year 2023, human content was 50% better than AI content.
Then we have a problem—AI-generated content is catching up. The moment the difference is not that major is the moment when your great-grandchildren will start watching Taitanic (I did wordplay again, but a little lamer this time).
A ship guided by robots sinks because a robot didn’t see an iceberg, and… wait, that’s impossible. I guess AI movies will be all about happy endings with no mistakes. The future of cinema is still safe. We need humans for good stories based on human error.
OpenAI, the company behind GPT, is releasing something called Sora. It creates AI videos looking like this:
Titanic cost around $198 million to create (if weighed in today's currency). Software like Pika will give you infinite credits to create videos similar to the above for $58 per month.
$58 versus $198 million is quite the question.
Should a human or an AI do this? The answers in favor of AI have been increasing over the years. That’s the core problem. We now have to compete against what we created.
The world won’t fire Hollywood and start creating their own titanics yet. That’d be utter chaos. It’d make a good movie, though. What they will do is start simple – eradicate the jobs that AI can do.
The elevator operator is no longer needed nowadays.
The software developer won’t be needed in a hundred years. (Don’t worry; chances are you’ll be long gone by then. Unless you’re two years old, in which case, focus on learning the alphabet.)
Every single job that exists nowadays has someone saying, “AI could do this, I’ll create a startup that does that and be rich!”
Construction? Figure AI is building a robot that could help do that.
Design? Midjourney creates images that are indistinguishable and that are winning awards.
Writing? I’m a writer. We won’t ever get replaced… Ha! Ha. ha. This “job” was eradicated five seconds after the release of ChatGPT. Yes, I’m doomed, but I still enjoy it.
It’s not really about the effectiveness of my writing. I’m not writing to sell. If I am, AI will do it better in the future. I’m writing to story tell. You’re reading because you’re interested in hearing a story.
Would you be as interested in knowing if this story was written by a machine? You probably won’t.
Your great-grandkids, though? Doubtful.
Evolving our brain capacity or simply replacing it.
What’s 11*12? 14*13? 9*9?
Here’s what happened: You memorized the multiplication table as a youngster. Then you started thinking that you don’t really need to do math in your brain if a calculator could do it faster. Nowadays, most people depend on their phones to find the answers to some of the above questions.
We simply reduced our brain workload by outsourcing the job to a calculator. Not only that, we were happy to do so and have no problems accepting it at this stage.
Your grandchildren will face this “calculator dilemma” with almost everything from food choices to their 9-5 jobs. If AI could do it faster and more accurately, why bother?
Now if that’s the case, then why are people freaking out and calling AI an extensional crisis? It all sounds like good news, right?
The calculator was a mistake
We’re on this space rock to evolve and survive.
If we don’t evolve, we don’t survive.
If we survive, we must evolve.
Our evolution has shifted from the physical to the mental. We’re not as big, and we’re not hunters anymore. That’s simply because we’re challenging our minds for quite a long time. We need to work “smart,” not “hard,” especially if a bear is trying to eat us.
We’ve been investing in our brains for thousands of years. How do we do that? How do we evolve our thinking? By simply challenging our tiny brains.
You sit in a creative meeting, and you hear the sentence, “Think outside of the box.”
You listen to a new song and think, “How did the singer think of those lyrics!” (especially if it’s Cardi B singing about the beauty of the human race. That’s a joke, btw.)
Now rest assured, you don’t need to think of maths, science, or physics. We’ll have an AI that does all of that.
You just sit at home and relax.
You don’t even have to worry about food or shelter.
You’ll get free food and rent for life.
You can thank those robots for working on your behalf.
The average human being will never face any problems.
The average human being will never have to challenge their brain anymore.
The average human being has no reason to evolve.
Instead of investing in that tiny brain, the world is freaking out because of an AI chip shortage to invest in. Rest assured, the more we invest in AI, the better it becomes.
It’s not one of those Terminator movies. It doesn’t have to be evil. It doesn’t have to launch nuclear weapons.
It simply has to make our lives easier, and nature will take its course.
So hang in there and await the report of the decrease in our IQ that ought to show up in twenty years.
Gosh, the gloominess – I can’t leave you on such a depressing note on the weekend. So, let’s get to the good part.
Call me naive – but I’m a believer in humans.
I believe that, sooner or later, it’s going to be clear that something is not right. We’re in a system where everything seems to be going according to plan. We feel comfortable.
Only when we don’t, which will happen in time, will we start to object.
AI does not have to design everything.
AI does not have to decide on your day.
AI does not have to evolve instead of you.
The small actions we do every day are part of the evolutionary marathon. Don’t take that away.
People will start to do the small things and will reject AI’s help, even if it consumes more time. We’ll refuse the shortcut because we need the experience.
Call me naive, but that’s what gives me a good night's sleep.
What do you think, though? Comment and let me know. I like Substack these days. So, I’ll definitely respond. Have a great weekend, you!
Agree on both counts, especially on the reduction in film/creative costs. And looking forward to a 20-year long discussion. Lots to engage our brains on!
What a rollercoaster of emotions this was lol. I really enjoyed this read - and your insight is extremely appreciated. It's taking a very depressing (albeit realistic) angle, but I'm sure we'll realize sooner or later that laziness isn't the way forward...