Wharton professor: 4 scenarios for AI’s future | Ethan Mollick for Big Think+

Wharton professor Ethan Mollick explains why “co-intelligence” may be the future of AI.

Ethan Mollick, professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and author of "Co-Intelligence: Living and Working with AI," explores the impact of AI on our work, creative endeavors, and overall lives.

AI is reshaping our understanding of humanity and intelligence, evolving from simple prediction tools to sophisticated large language models, but how do we keep it from dooming us all? Should we be more afraid of it, or are we actually in control? Mollick proposes four most likely predictions of our future with AI – As Good As It Gets, Slow Growth, Exponential Growth, and The Machine God – and explains the likelihood and potential results of each one.

Mollick stresses the importance of using AI as a supplemental tool to enhance your performance, not as something that will replace you entirely. According to Mollick, AI is here to stay, and it’s up to us to decide how it is used now, and in generations to come. Our choices today will shape the trajectory of AI and determine whether it becomes a force for good or a source of existential risk.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go Deeper with Big Think:

►Become a Big Think Member

►Get Big Think+ for Business

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Ethan Mollick:

Ethan Mollick is a professor of management at Wharton, specializing in entrepreneurship and innovation. His research has been featured in various publications, including Forbes, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. He is the creator of numerous educational games on a variety of topics. He lives and teaches in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

[themaestrodamus]

This is a very optimistic view. If you consider the quintessential flaw of humans coupled with the exponential growth of AI, then, you should be very worried. We WILL use it wrong and it WILL backfire. It’s in our nature, we can’t help ourselves. Stems from our curiosity. It’s that “How far can we push this thing and can it REALLY do what we think it could do?”

[nilo_river]

This vision is very optimistic and does not consider human ego and greed. It's actually going to be really bad. Make no mistake, be ready for a dystopian future.

[vincentginobeltran]

"One often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it"
-Master Oogway

[gravestone]

I argue that we need AI to take our jobs away. Once menial tasks and basic labor and production jobs are no longer necessary it frees us up to do the things that make us human. We would all become artists, musicians, athletes, artisans, philosophers, scientists, creators and explorers. The transition will be uncomfortable but society will reform itself around valuing humans for their human qualities and economies will follow suit.

[natesmith]

“If you haven’t stayed up 3 nights anxious about it, you probably haven’t experienced AI”… proceeds to brush off the machine god scenario. Dude! That’s what I’m anxious about!

[mav]

"When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success."

~Oppenheimer

[soraiya]

I love how this comments section is full of people who completely disagree with this video's stance. In this particular case, if you want to know what the people really think, it's in the comments section, not in the video.

[SouthernMenace]

I don't get the optimism, especially in a late-term capitalist society.

AI will be lead to where companies can make more money. Period. History and Sociology show us that abundantly.

[gordongekko]

I think this interview illustrates the flaw of constant optimism. Optimists are very positive people and they are good for morale. But, I've worked with optimists and their weakness is that they always have a blind spot for bad actors. In this case, it only takes one or two bad actors (China, N Korea, Russia) to ruin everyone's life. Mutually assured destruction is the primary reason why we haven't gone the way of the dinosaur. But, cyber attacks are more complex, harder to track, and seem to generate a more murky response from opposing governments. So, it has been a nuisance that we've lived with for years. Now with the power of AI, imagine the cyber threat increasing ten fold, a hundred fold. It could, in theory, make it virtually impossible to safely access the internet, setting us back decades.

[markp]

GPT = Generative Pre-Trained Transformer

[Mujahed]

you didn't explain the point you mentioned in your title. I clicked expecting to hear why the machine god isn't the AI scenario I needed to worry about but got nothing in that direction. oh we get distracted by the extreme option, lets focus on the others. Well that did not at all explain why I should not worry about the extreme option. Big think you are a decent channel, please don't engage in click bait.

[vogrilgraywood]

The problem with AI isn't that people are worried about it for no reason, the problem is the majority of people are powerless in the realm of AI. Only a hand full of people world wide have real control or access to AI and those people are almost entirely money motivated, so how can you say we shouldn't be afraid or worried.

In addition, statistical its been shown that around 90% of people dislike AI every time they encounter it and trust companies less when they use it. The real question should be if the vast majority of people don't like or trust AI why should we continue with it?

[JohnAllen]

This sounds like someone speculating what life is all about before being born.

[RasMannKAZMO]

What a time to be alive! Really curious on what the world is going to be like 50-60years from now.

[craigmerkey]

Great insight... as a learning disabled person I have received a lot of support from technology, such as spelling, sentence structure, and definitely math! I am looking forward to AI and technology helping me move through the required compliance pieces of my job that I find difficult and mundane. This will free up time to enjoy the personal interaction part which I excel at.

[PunmasterSTP]

Between AI and other world events, it definitely seems like we're reaching the endgame.

[roelvandelden]

"we get to decide how this thing is used" is not how I see how this is going to roll out. Large companies are deciding how they can use AI. They own it. They made it. Using our (biassed, entertainment, sometimes shallow) content from the internet. Companies like Meta + AI = I'm out.

[louisguerin]

I found the stance of "don't worry about the tool you are making !". It would only make sense if both user were responsible & understood the tool. And any way at some level of complexity humans wouldn't be able (or care) to understand fully what the tool is going to do if they "trust" it will get to the result. (I don't think every user will only trust the AI when it makes sense when the lazy answer is to press go).

[perks]

I'm not afraid of Hal from '2001: A Space Odyssey', I'm afraid of AM from 'I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream'

[LDMTX]

At the moment, AI has given me the powerful ability to be a graphic designer, illustrator and photographer but soon there won’t be a need for graphic designers, illustrators nor photographers.