That’s one of the questions explored in a modern paper by Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at the University of Oxford, whose recent book argued that humanity faces a one in six chance of being wiped out within the next 100 years, perhaps because of the development of threatening forms of artificial intelligence ( AI). In Mr. Bostrom’s latest book, “Deep Utopia,” he considers a rather different outcome. What happens if the AI does exceptionally well? In one of the scenarios Mr. Bostrom considers, technology advances to the point where it can perform all economically valuable work at almost zero cost. In an even more radical scenario, even tasks that might seem reserved for humans, such as parenting, could be better performed by artificial intelligence. This may sound more dystopian than utopian, but Bostrom argues otherwise.
Start with the first scenario, which Bostrom calls the “post-scarcity” utopia. In such a world, the need for labor would decrease. Nearly a century ago, John Maynard Keynes wrote an essay titled “Economic Opportunities for Our Grandchildren” that predicted that in 100 years his wealthy descendants would only have to work 15 hours a week. This didn’t quite come true, but the working time was significantly reduced. In the luxurious world, average weekly working hours have fallen from more than 60 in the tardy 19th century to less than 40 today. The typical American spends one third of their time on entertainment and sports. In the future, they may want to spend their time on things that are beyond humanity’s current understanding. As Bostrom writes, with the support of powerful technology, “the space of experiences possible for us extends far beyond those available to us with our current unoptimized brains.”
However, Bostrom’s label as a “post-scarcity” utopia may be somewhat misleading: the economic explosion brought about by superintelligence will still be circumscribed by physical resources, especially land. Although space exploration can enormously boost the available building space, it will not make it infinite. There are also intermediate worlds where humans develop powerful modern forms of intelligence but do not travel into space. In such worlds, wealth may be fantastic, but much of it may be absorbed by housing – as is the case with luxurious countries today.
“Positional goods” that enhance the status of their owners also likely still exist and are, by their nature, uncommon. Even if AI outperforms humans in art, intellect, music, and sports, humans will likely still derive value from outperforming other humans, for example by owning tickets to the hottest events. In 1977, economist Fred Hirsch argued in “The Social Limits to Growth” that as wealth increases, a greater share of human desires consists of positional goods. The time spent competing increases, the price of such goods increases, and, consequently, their share in GDP increases. This pattern may continue in the AI utopia.
Bostrom notes that some types of competition create a lack of coordination: if everyone agrees to stop competing, they will have time for other, better things, which could further spur growth. However, some types of competition, such as sports, have intrinsic value and are worth protecting. (People may also have nothing better to do.) Interest in chess has increased since IBM’s Deep Blue first defeated Garry Kasparov, then the world champion, in 1997. An entire industry has developed around e-sports, where computers can comfortably beat humans. Their revenue is expected to grow at a rate of 20% annually over the next decade and reach nearly $11 billion by 2032. Several social groups give us an idea of how future people will be able to spend their time. Aristocrats and bohemians like art. Monks live within themselves. Athletes devote their entire lives to sports. Retirees engage in all these activities.
Everyone is taking early retirement
Won’t tasks like parenting remain a human mainstay? Bostrom isn’t so sure. He argues that beyond the post-scarcity world there is a “post-instrumental” world in which artificial intelligence will also become superhuman in child care. Keynes himself wrote that “there is no country or people, I believe, who can look forward to an age of leisure and plenty without fear, for too long have we been trained to pursue rather than to enjoy… Judging by behavior and achievements luxurious classes today in any corner of the world, the prospects are very promising. depressing!” The Bible puts it more succinctly: “idle hands are the devil’s workshop.”
This active suggests a “paradox of progress.” Although most people want a better world, if technology becomes too advanced, they may lose their purpose. Bostrom argues that most people would still enjoy activities that have intrinsic value, such as eating tasty food. Utopians, believing that life has become too uncomplicated, may take up the challenge, perhaps colonizing a modern planet to try to re-engineer civilization. However, at some point even such adventures may no longer seem worthwhile. It’s an open question how long people would be ecstatic jumping between passions as Peer does in “The City of Permutations.” Economists have long believed that humans have “unlimited wants and desires,” which suggests that there is an infinite variety of things that people would like to consume. With the advent of the AI utopia, this will be put to the test. A lot will depend on the result.
For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up Money talksour weekly newsletter available only to subscribers.
© 2024, The Economist Newspaper Narrow. All rights reserved. From The Economist, published under license. Original content can be found at www.economist.com
Posted: Jun 09, 2024 19:04 EST
