Advertisement

AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 313–321 | Cite as

Nothing but a human

  • Francesco GaribaldoEmail author
  • Emilio Rebecchi
Original Article

Abstract

The dream of the perpetual motion charms us since millennia, the desire of machines substituting men was present already in the imperial China and the classical Rome; the medieval alchemists tried to build automata, automata showed up in the Renaissance princes’ plays. In the Aladdin fable, the sorcerer satisfies on the instant all wishes of the lamp’s owner. In other words, the fiction of omnipotence accompanies humanity from the very beginning. Is God omnipotent? So, why not humanity? Building automatic factories, digital modelling of human work, both makes realistic what looked utopian. It can perhaps be achieved an unmanned production mode, and where machines can produce whatever we can desire, endlessly. Are numbers not from zero to infinity? There is, nonetheless, an obstacle. Human desires are subjective; therefore, from the standpoint of the producers, of the automatic factory’s owner, there is a very difficult problem to go through. How to manage human desires? How to transform the desire itself in an automatic factor of the production? Digital modelling of human work is not enough; the human itself must be modelled. The full control of him/her must be achieved. It means understanding a priori each of his/her desire. It means leading him/her step by step all their lives long. It means, shortly, to transform him/her into automata. The nightmare of a bees’ or ants’ society, the nightmare of losing his/her free will comes closer and looks menacing. It looks like the black clouds of a threatening thunderstorm.

Keywords

Digital modelling Desires Subjectivity Big other Artificial parent AI Human brain Creativity 

References

  1. Dormehl L (2017) Thinking machines. The quest for artificial intelligence and where it’s taking us next. Penguin Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Freud S (1914) On narcissism: an introduction, Kindle edn. Read Books LtdGoogle Scholar
  3. Kurzweil R (2005) The singularity is near. When humans transcend biology. Penguin Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Noble DF (1979) Social choice in machine design. In: Zimbalist A (ed) Case studies on the labor process. Monthly Review Press, New York, pp 100–134Google Scholar
  5. Noble DF (1986) Forces of production: a social history industrial automation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Norman D, Nielsen J (2012) The definition of user experience (UX). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/definition-user-experience/
  7. O’Neil C (2016) Weapons of math destruction. How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Penguin Random House, UKzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Risdon C (2016) Shaping behavior, by design live!—UIE Brain Sparks. https://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2016/06/30/chris-risdon-shaping-behavior-by-design-live/. Accessed 27 June 2017
  9. Stanford University (2016) One hundred year study on artificial intelligence (AI100). Stanford University. https://ai100.stanford.edu. Accessed 27 June 2017
  10. Varian HR (2014) Beyond big data. Business Econ 49(1):27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Winner L (1985) Do artifacts have politics? In Daedalus, vol 109, no. 1, Winter 1980. Reprinted in the social shaping of technology, edited by Donald A. MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (London: Open University Press: second edition 1999)Google Scholar
  12. Zuboff S (2015) Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. J Inf Technol 30:75–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BolognaItaly
  2. 2.BolognaItaly
  3. 3.“Claudio Sabattini” FoundationBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations