Living with Artificial Intelligence
AI development aggregate in campuses and industry saw a sharp increase of nearly seven times more than the aggregate of the early 2000s.
.
Whoever succeeds in mastering artificial intelligence (AI) will control the world. (Vladimir Putin)
We are on the brink of a revolution. A world-scale revolution. Different from the social revolution, this will be the social-tech revolution.
Its “conspirators” will not be activists of labor unions, students or economic philosophers. Its activists will be imaginative people that come across mathematics and algorithm.
This is not the first time imaginative people have turned to mathematics. However, it is only in this current 21st century that “agents” of such change can be found in kampung, campuses or localized factories. Indeed, they are present in supercomputers, intelligent robots and artificial intelligence, smartphones, laptops and even wristwatches. Bullets are no longer sharp metal with gunpowder – instead, we are faced with big data, which tracks everything from daily habits and favorite music to blood pressure and type.
Welcome to the fourth “Industrial Revolution,” where facts can be verified. This is a revolution that will obscure the borders of physical, digital and biological spaces; a revolution that will force us to live together with intelligent robots, which will serve or take over 58 percent of physical work, leaving creativity to the brains and muscles of human beings.
Networking
Networking is the face of the digital era. It is actually the real face of nature and community, which has been hidden for a long time because of information technology algorithms. It makes the world seem like a “village” where nothing seems far in distance. Technology has connected nearly all things in the world to massive physical and digital networking, where communication, goods and services flow freely on a scale that was unimaginable previously. All vertical social hierarchies are becoming horizontal or, at least, diagonal.
In this networking age, the digital economy has grown and increasingly dominates. Within 20 years since the birth of internet, its global potential is predicted to reach US$3 trillion. The digital world is no longer simply a part of the economy, but it is the economy itself. Networking constitutes a natural container to raise a new economic paradigm based on participatory market societies, such as mutual cooperation among villagers. This collaborative approach slowly becomes a concept that rearranges the economic practices of the millennial generation, replacing the dominant competitive spirit of the previous era.
Within the majority of current disruptive businesses emerges collaboration based on technological platforms. Collaboration becomes the main requirement to enable companies to innovate and compete in the continuously changing global market. Cooperation of regions becomes a requirement for the establishment of an economic structure that is strong and crisis-resistant. The cooperation of individuals has become the main factor in achieving joint success. Villages must become working villages, networking villages and innovative villages in order to be waras bareng (healthy together), pinter bareng (intelligent together) and sugih bareng (wealthy together).
In the digital era, we celebrate the birth of social human beings as an alternative to economic human beings. Different from the economic human beings who are egoistic, the social human being strives to make decisions based on consequences and against the backdrop of a collaborative environment.
The route toward social human beings’ success is not toward a pyramid of superiority in which one individual squares off against another, but, rather, it is toward a central networking system among individuals and natural resources. Individual superiority is no longer measured in terms of natural resources being controlled – instead, it takes into account the extent in which those in charge consider the entire network. Point of balance is no longer on the peak of the static pyramid, but on points of social networking, which continuously move.
This paradigm shift will lead to the emergence of very fundamental differences on a macro scale. The paradigm of economic human beings as the foundation of economic activity has resulted in a natural resource exploitation problem, inequality, pollution and environmental damage. We know the term “tragedy of the commons.” Tragedy being hot, submerged or breathless will happen to anyone, regardless of their religion, race, Twitter account or WhatsApp group. It is very possible to settle the problem in the current era. Connectivity in the digital era has created an environment that enables participation and cooperation in a bottom-up, self-regulatory way. However, it cannot emerge by itself. We need to intentionally prepare institutional frameworks that are in line with the very spirit of collaboration and participation that makes an impact socially and individually. This requires political action.
Scenarios
Projections of our future in the digital era do not always end well. They can be in the form of nightmares that throw us into division and leave us in the dust. The first problem is inequality in accessing information technology. Internet penetration in Indonesia at present is still at around 25 percent of the population, the majority of which are in Java and Sumatra – this is where we see the digital divide. Access to technology requires social mobility in the digital era. However, currently, it is still influenced by education levels, income and social connections. A society of equal access has to be accompanied by gains in literacy over technology. The technological revolution has put pressure on us to speed up the country’s education revolution. Education has to give emphasis on the mastery of “the learning method” rather than simply comprehending a lot of things because comprehending a lot is no longer special in the digital era. Learning the “way to learn” in the form of formulating questions appropriately will increase the adaptive capability of Indonesian human beings as changes come.
The second problem is that the production automation process by machines and robots will shake up the manpower market. Technological advancements have enabled the production of goods and services to take place without involving a large number of workers. This gives signal that the fourth industrial revolution will end up simply emulating the reality of high inequality among individuals and among regions. It is clear we need a new conceptual and institutional framework to get rid of it. Again, this requires political action.
The first alternative direction is the concept of a sharing state through the fulfillment of universal basic income (UBI) whereby the state guarantees a minimum income for every citizen to allow them to get by even if no jobs present themselves. UBI, besides being a social safety net, will also give freedom to everyone to explore aesthetic creativity, letting the physical issues be handled by machines and robots. When AI transport rocks or conduct heart surgery, engineers and doctors will create poems and play scripts. The state would then have to guarantee them three meals a day so they could tap into their creative spirit.
The second alternative is the concept of sharing companies through the existence of financial valuation and compensation to the public over the private information they give “voluntarily” in the digital spaces. The “free” information about cholesterol, favorite films, or heart pulses is a currency that has become the main source of profit for current corporate technology. This is precisely what I saw in the central office of a technology company in Silicon Valley several weeks ago. Public information in the digital space has entered the open asset category, to speak not of the concept of public and private assets, which need to get protection from the state. Profits from the assets have to be able to be evaluated to later be returned in the form of financial benefits for the public. Once again, political action is needed in the form of laws.
According to an annual report, the AI Vibrancy Index 2017, the AI development aggregate in campuses (scientific publications, conferences, others) and industry (investment values, start-ups, others) saw a sharp increase of nearly seven times more than the aggregate of the early 2000s. The US, Russia and China are three countries in the race to master AI technology, both in research contribution, industry investment and technological adoption. This alone has shed light on the future course of our world. Indonesia should not just stare open-mouthed at something like this.
Of course, for Indonesia, the aforementioned quote from Putin does not fall within the world’s dominating framework. AI mastery is more than just “following the implementation of a world order that is based on freedom, eternal peace and social justice” as mandated by our constitution. We also have a lot of work to do to immediately improve general welfare and develop a “smarter” nation because the sharing-economy model that is now in trending is not widespread, especially for lower-income people. We need to encourage such a system through UBI, universal basic assets and technological utilization from businesses, such as village-owned business enterprises (BUMDs) and business entities belonging to villagers. Only with that will all Indonesian people in villages and cities be ready to face the fourth industrial revolution with happy faces.
BUDIMAN SUDJATMIKO
Chairman of the board of supervisors of the Association of Indonesia’s Village Government Apparatuses (Papdesi).
