#NextBigThing #AI #DataCenters #innovation #LostJobs #environment #profits
Is it the thrill of the hunt, or the glory of the reward?
Several news outlets have discussed whether today’s technology innovators, particularly those involved with artificial intelligence, are working to make the world a better place, or to make money.
They’ve talked about the speed with which each is working. They’ve talked about the indifference of side effects these new technologies will produce.
In biotechnology, for example, researchers are obviously interested in making a profit for their respective companies, but they are just as interested, if not more so, in producing a product that will save more lives.
They weigh the results as well as the side effects in their clinical studies. They weigh whether patients will sacrifice side effects to boost their survival chances.
But, artificial intelligence is different. The researchers can foresee potential game changers in their research. Seemingly, though, they are paying little attention to what the outcomes might do to people, neighborhoods and our way of life.
They potentially can make companies and operations more productive, but what about the jobs they will eliminate? What about the potential damage their processes will do to the environment?
Average folks who are reading and hearing about this – or, perhaps, experiencing it themselves – are asking for caution. They are asking for a pause, or to slow down the progress of these developments until the consequences can be properly assessed.
Still, the innovators are pressing full steam ahead. They want to beat their competitors. They’ve invested billions of dollars into their research and are eager to see a return on that investment.
Both of these are understandable concepts from that side of the ledger. But will the side effects for those who would use these products be more profound than the progress itself?
People are asking government to be the backstop here. But, it’s hard to stop innovation that is proceeding rapidly. It’s hard to stop a speeding car by standing in front of it.
Therefore, it’s up to the innovators themselves to provide the bulk of the caution. It’s incumbent on these smart people not to be Frankenstein, and create a monster that will destroy life — that can’t be stopped.
It’s a marvelous achievement to create something no one else has created. It’s great to invent a machine that will do many things humans do, but faster and more efficiently.
But, revolutions of all types can produce backlash. The innovators have to weigh whether what they are creating will do more harm than good, even in the short term.
Something that ultimately saves some lives, but kills others in the process, may not be worth producing on a large scale.
Facilitating mechanical or mundane tasks is a good thing. But, people who used to perform those tasks may never be able to recover from their lost jobs, lost way of life etc.
Curing a disease, or prolonging human life, may be worth the potential side effects. But, having machines take over for people may not be.
If you are among the innovators, remember that innovation for its own sake may not be a good outcome. It’s up to you, mainly, to use your creative genius not only to innovate, but also to manage the outcomes.
Peter