He joined Google in 2007, [7] and eventually rose to the position of chief business officer at Google X. [8] Internationally bestselling author of Solve for Happy and former chief business officer at Google [X], Mo Gawdat has spent more than three decades at the forefront of technological development. His latest book, Scary Smartprovides an ominous warning about artificial intelligence. When machines are specifically built to discriminate, rank and categorize, how do we expect to teach them to value equality?' And so, there is a lot of inclusion in our core ethical and moral framework. I have to say, though, as we move forward, the question of ethics becomes mind boggling. I failed very early in the chapter to find any answers at all. I humbled myself and turned it into a chapter of questions. When you start to understand, again the main premise is that AI is not a tool, it’s not a machine. If I take a hammer and I smash this computer in front of me, it would be stupid and wasteful. But there is nothing wrong here. But if that computer has been spending the last 10 years of its life developing memories and knowledge and unique intelligence, and able to communicate to other machines and in every possible way, it had agency and freedom of action and free will, and it basically is a crime when you think about it. Now you’re dealing with a sentient being that is autonomous in every possible way. And when you start to think about life that way, you start to go like, okay so how do we achieve equality if we failed to achieve equality across gender and colour and sex and so on, in our limited human abilities so far? Can we even accept a being that is non-biological, a digital form of sentient being into our lives? And if we accept them, how do we unify things? Who is to blame if a self-driving car kills somebody? Because if it’s a sentient being, maybe we should hold it accountable. But what if we hold it accountable? Who do we put in jail, the car? for what, 4-5 years? And if you put one car in jail for five years you flimsy, worthless creature, what will the other cars do? And when you really start to think about it, would they agree to that code of conduct if five years for you and I is 12 percent of our life expectancy, but for an AI, it is a blip really, because their life expectancy is endless, but at the same time, they measure life in microseconds. So, it would feel like five hundred thousand years. Strap in for the ride, we’re diving headfirst into this conversation and uncovering the alarming truth about how vulnerable we actually are and what that means for the next decade ahead.

Scary Smart | Mo Gawdat

The answer to how we can prepare the machines for this ethically complex world resides in the way we raise our own children and prepare them to face our complex world’ So, you go across the Atlantic and the moral makeup is patriotism and it’s ok to kill the other guy. You go in Dharamsala, where the Dalai Lama and the Buddhists would live, and they go, like, ‘don’t kill a fly’, right? We haven’t agreed… We haven’t managed to agree. And I think my book is centred around this. And you know that because always the very last statement of any one of my books is basically the summary of the message and the summary of scary smart is, isn’t it ironic that the core of what makes us human – love, compassion and happiness, is what could save us in the age of the rise of the machines? And I think if we were to be realistic, the only ethics humanity has ever agreed was that we all want to be happy. However, it feels like it was written entirely using text-to-speech (which the author multiple times does indeed mention he uses), making it feel like I am reading a waffly podcast script.Former Chief Business Officer for Google X and author of the books 'Solve for Happy' and 'Scary Smart' Mo Gawdat joins Piers Morgan Uncensored to talk about the dangers of Artificial Intelligence and how his work helped him cope with the death of his son. Including regulating our environment and economy and everything else computers currently do, and a whole lot more that we simply can’t predict, because we won’t be the ones inventing it or even making it anymore. Most importantly however, in the latter part of the book, he shares a totally hitherto unique point of view on how we can embrace this movement and use it as an aid in building a better world, since we cannot stop it’s progress. Gawdat’s writing style is also a plus. It’s conversational, which means it’s like sitting down with a friend (albeit a very informed one) for a chat about the future. There’s no heavy academic jargon here, and I truly appreciated that. It made the reading experience fluid and engaging.

Scary Smart by Mo Gawdat - Pan Macmillan Scary Smart by Mo Gawdat - Pan Macmillan

In this book we get served examples of AI in terms of existing applications, future ones and most importantly, an expert’s explanation of the accumulative process that makes AI self-learning. So far in the same arena as Harari in Homo Deus. If we all refuse to buy the next version of the iPhone, because we really don’t need a fancier look or an even better camera at the expense of our environment, Apple will understand that they need to create something that we actually need. If we insist that we will not buy a new phone until it delivers a real benefit, like helping us make our life more sustainable or improving our digital health, that will be the product that is created next. Similarly, if we make it clear that we welcome AI into our lives only when it delivers benefit to ourselves and to our planet, and reject it when it doesn’t, AI developers will try to capture that opportunity. Keep doing this consistently and the needle will shift.

Recent articles

His perspective on AI as a new form of life is indeed thought-provoking. He presents AI not just as algorithms and data but as an evolving entity, shaped by our inputs and interactions. This perspective challenges the traditional boundaries of what we define as "life" and pushes us to expand our understanding. It's hard not to be convinced after diving into that section, as it paints a vivid picture of AI's place in our distant future.

Scary Smart: The Future of Artificial Intelligence and Scary Smart: The Future of Artificial Intelligence and

Clifford, Catherine (24 August 2018). "This former Google X exec reverse engineered happiness — here's what he found". NBC News. In Scary Smart,The former chief business officer of Googleoutlines how artificial intelligence is way smarter than us, and is predicted to be a billion times more intelligent than humans by 2049. Free from distractions and working at incredible speeds, AI can look into the future and make informed predictions, looking around corners both real and virtual.

Hey!

Another highlight for me was his unique take on how our actions today – both individually and collectively – can influence the AI of tomorrow. It’s a compelling perspective that emphasizes our agency and responsibility in this rapidly advancing digital age. Instead of painting a picture where AI is something done to us, he suggests it's something we can shape and mold, at least to a certain degree. This concept, which he discusses in various chapters, adds a hopeful undertone to the narrative. uses ellipsis and mid line placement to stress what it thinks are important points, like an 8 year old’s creative writing. I am glad my riding school care for their mammalian horses to buy an expensive machine for us to study and improve our riding aids and position. For example, if a young girl suddenly jumps in the middle of the road in front of a self-driving car, the car needs to make a swift decision that might inevitably hurt someone else. Either turn a bit to the left and hit an old lady, to save the life of the young girl, or stay on course and hit the girl. What is the ethical choice to make? Should the car value the young more than the old? Or should it hold everyone accountable and not claim the life of the lady who did nothing wrong? What if it was two old ladies? What if one was a scientist who the machines knew was about to find a cure for cancer? What determines the right ethical code then? Would we sue the car for making either choice? Who bears the responsibility for the choice? Its owner? Manufacturer? Or software designer? Would that be fair when the AI running the car has been influenced by its own learning path and not through the influence of any of them?