top of page

By:

Prasad Dixit

11 October 2024 at 1:09:23 am

The Human Advantage in an Artificial Age

As artificial intelligence grows smarter and more efficient, the real battle may not be about machines surpassing humanity but about whether humans squander the qualities that still set them apart. With the recent news of a Chinese robot beating the human record in a half- marathon, there is renewed debate on how AI could outsmart human beings. Many experts see it as yet another proof of impending disaster as AI takes over most of the jobs in the years to come. This is not the first time when...

The Human Advantage in an Artificial Age

As artificial intelligence grows smarter and more efficient, the real battle may not be about machines surpassing humanity but about whether humans squander the qualities that still set them apart. With the recent news of a Chinese robot beating the human record in a half- marathon, there is renewed debate on how AI could outsmart human beings. Many experts see it as yet another proof of impending disaster as AI takes over most of the jobs in the years to come. This is not the first time when human civilization is facing a technological revolution that has the potential to impact society and economy in a profound manner. There is, however, a crucial difference with AI driven revolution that is often missed out. The first industrial revolution happened because steam engines were invented and it led to mechanization of production. It was followed by discovery of electrical energy and technologies to harness it for mass production. Next wave of evolution was led by computerization and automation in practically all the fields covering both offices and industrial shop floors through mainframes, personal computers, and programmable logic controllers. While all these leaps in technologies are very different in terms of the specific underlying inventions, they all have one thing in common. They were all invented to do things that were humanly impossible to do. One steam engine or electric motor could do the work that perhaps hundreds of humans would never be able to accomplish even with their collective muscle power. Automation of the manufacturing assembly line would deliver speed and accuracy that human beings would never be able to achieve. Beyond Human Technological advances in Telecommunication, for that matter, have simply expanded the range of 'hearing' and 'seeing' far beyond what human vocal chords, ears, and eyes could manage to do on their own. Computers, at its core, are essentially doing the math and calculations at a speed and accuracy that the human brain can never achieve. To add to that, machines using all these innovations in technology would work tirelessly without any fatigue for a duration that human beings would never be able to match. Although AI is yet another highly potent technological innovation, it is not as straightforward as the previous ones. It can absorb and synthesize huge amounts of data that the human brain perhaps cannot do. Ability of AI to answer any question reasonably well using all the global knowledge made available to it, summarize enormous amount of data and text quickly, quickly draw a complex picture based on instructions given verbally, predict a trend, recognize and highlight a specific face in a fraction of a second from millions of faces, write code based on simple English instructions, are all examples where the speed and accuracy of underlying computation is delivering what human being cannot match. However, there are several areas where human beings are trying to improve AI so that it can, some day, match or exceed capability that human beings themselves already have. Examples of this include the ability of AI to completely replace a human driver safely in all situations, understand full context or an intent behind a statement, carry out complex and well-coordinated mechanical activity in response to various unpredictable situations, react appropriately by correctly assessing the emotions at play, integrate generated code appropriately in the existing larger systems landscape, and so on. In such cases, AI is not exhibiting any capability that is humanly impossible to match. On the contrary, AI is trying to catch up with what humans can do easily. In other words, in these areas, AI is trying to become what humans already are. This very aspect separates AI driven technology revolution from all the previous ones. Direct Competition It is often said that AI and humans will co-exist in the future, and people will need to change their ways of working. It is obvious that AI is also going to directly compete with humans in many sectors. Equipment with an embedded chip on-board do compete with humans even today. A case in point is household equipment such as ‘intelligent’ washing machines and dish-washers where robots to do vacuum cleaning and floor mopping do compete with humans offering these services. A human household help can perform these activities far better than what a machine can do. However, given an affordable choice, an increasing number of households prefer machines over human maid services for a reason. Human household help may not always be punctual, sincere, honest, and reliable. But machines are. Uncontrolled emotions, anger, frustration, laziness, indiscipline, absenteeism do affect humans - but not AI driven machines (at least till the time AI itself acquires emotions of its own, and becomes self-aware some day). This aspect of comparison between AI and humans is likely to become far more prominent and consequential as AI driven machines and robots become more and more intelligent and thereby start competing far more effectively with human capability in many spheres. Competition is said to bring about improvement. Just as AI improves itself through continuous learning to mimic human behaviour and actions, human workforce also needs to improve itself by avoiding behavioural issues and inefficiencies referred to above. Otherwise, humans would lose the natural advantage that they still enjoy over AI, and which is likely to continue even in the foreseeable future. Employers or consumers in the labour-intensive service sector will accept AI driven machines and robots with all its known limitations if it turns out to be a better net-net deal in comparison to services offered by humans. This specific aspect has tremendous significance for India. Many Countries from the developed world do not have a young population with reasonably good IQ in required numbers. India, on the other hand, has it in abundance. One could compare it with abundant availability of Thorium or Sunlight in India as compared to the Western world. Consequently, unlike many Countries in the world that have a Uranium centric approach towards nuclear energy, India's approach needs to be centered around Thorium. India's strategy related to renewable, non-conventional, green energy needs to be based on solar power. Indian Context Strategies for adopting AI in the Indian context need to be similarly tailored for the Indian context. India needs to adopt AI in the areas where it clearly has an advantage over humans in terms of speed, throughput, ease of use, accuracy, and efficiency. However, the use of AI needs to be judiciously controlled in areas where AI is trying to catch up with the capabilities of the human mind and body. Several labour-intensive services such as drivers, caregivers for the elderly people, parcel delivery, security guards, maintenance and repair of various equipment, are all examples in that category. Educational policies and overall work culture in the Country needs to appreciate this reality. Just as AI experts are trying hard to 'teach' AI algorithms and improve them through supervised learning, another set of experts need to sensitize and teach humans on how to understand, appreciate, preserve, and further hone the significant natural advantage that they already have over AI. Despite all the technological breakthroughs in AI, in many areas, still, it is a battle that humans will lose only if they choose to. (The writer works in the Information Technology sector. Views personal.)

A Crisis of Leadership

Updated: Jan 2, 2025

South Korea

South Korea, a nation long admired for its economic resilience and democratic progress, has been grappling with one of the gravest political crises in its modern history throughout the past month. Opposition lawmakers are gearing up to impeach the acting president and prime minister, Han Duck-soo, following the suspension of President Yoon Suk-yeol earlier this month. The resulting political vacuum has not only destabilized governance but also sent tremors through the economy, plunging the won to record lows and unnerving both businesses and consumers.


On December 3, President Yoon shocked the nation by declaring martial law, a move not seen since South Korea’s authoritarian era ended in the 1980s. Accused of insurrection, Yoon deployed troops to prevent lawmakers from overturning his decree and detain opponents, a flashpoint that led to his impeachment on December 14. With Yoon suspended, Han was thrust into the role of acting president, only to find himself mired in controversy two weeks later.


At the center of the current impasse is the Constitutional Court, which now finds itself weakened, operating with just six justices out of the usual nine. Opposition lawmakers accuse Han of deliberately stalling the appointment of three new judges, ostensibly to tip the scales in favour of Yoon. The opposition has called for Han’s impeachment, arguing that he is complicit in Yoon’s unconstitutional actions.


This political deadlock has turned South Korea’s National Assembly into a battlefield. The ruling People Power Party insists that only an elected president has the authority to appoint Constitutional Court justices, while the opposition Democratic Party contends that Han must act decisively in his interim role. Han, a career bureaucrat known for his cautious demeanour, has refused to budge, asserting that an acting president should refrain from exercising the president’s substantive powers.


The Constitutional Court requires six votes to uphold Yoon’s impeachment, meaning a single dissent could reinstate him. With only six justices currently seated, any appointment—or the lack thereof—could influence the court’s ruling. The opposition argues that Han’s impeachment requires only a simple majority in the National Assembly, while the ruling party claims a two-thirds majority is necessary. South Korea’s democracy, tested before during the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye in 2017, now faces a new strain. This time, the crisis is exacerbated by economic turmoil. The Won has tumbled to levels not seen since the global financial crisis, and the stock market has fallen sharply, defying gains in other Asian indices. Political uncertainty has shaken investor confidence, threatening to derail an economy already struggling with global headwinds.


The crisis has also thrust unexpected figures into the spotlight. Woo Won-shik, the Speaker of the National Assembly, has emerged as a symbol of leadership amidst the chaos. Historically, the speaker’s role in South Korea has been ceremonial, but Woo’s decisive actions during the current turmoil have won public trust. A former student activist jailed during South Korea’s fight against military rule in the 1980s, Woo’s personal history resonates in a country still haunted by memories of authoritarianism.


On December 3, as troops blocked access to the National Assembly, Woo scaled a fence to ensure lawmakers could vote against martial law. His actions have drawn comparisons to the Gwangju Uprising of 1980, when citizens rose against military rule following the assassination of President Park Chung-hee. Woo’s leadership has provided a rare glimmer of hope.


Yet, hope alone cannot resolve South Korea’s deepening crisis. The nation finds itself in uncharted territory, with both its president and acting president under siege. The prolonged vacuum in leadership risks eroding public faith in democratic institutions, a perilous development for a nation that has painstakingly built its democratic foundations over the past four decades.


The ambiguous powers of an acting president, the susceptibility of the Constitutional Court to political manoeuvring and the fractious nature of party politics have all contributed to the current debacle. Reforms to clarify the roles and responsibilities of interim leaders and safeguard judicial independence are urgently needed. The world is watching, not least because South Korea’s fate holds lessons for democracies everywhere.

Comments

bottom of page