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.)

Pakistan’s Fire Within: Balochistan, Sindh and the Blowback of Proxy Wars

How Pakistan’s obsession with Kashmir has boomeranged into ethnic uprisings and secessionist sentiment at home.

Even as Pakistan reeled under the onslaught of India’s ‘Operation Sindoor,’ a deadlier reckoning unfolded at home. If reports are to be believed, in Balochistan’s parched expanse, a remote-controlled IED tore through an army convoy in Bolan, killing a dozen soldiers including two Special Operations commanders. Hours later, another ambush in Kech district compounded the toll. The responsibility for the attacks was claimed by the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). Days earlier, former Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi had warned that the Pakistani state was losing its grip on Balochistan. Abbasi’s warning was a dire premonition.


For decades, Pakistan has pursued its irredentist ambitions in Kashmir with the zeal of a state possessed. In this pursuit, it has cultivated proxy groups, sanctioned jihadist networks and allowed the military-intelligence complex to dominate national policymaking. But while the state’s gaze remained fixated on India, fires ignited at home - in Balochistan, Sindh, among the Mohajirs and Pashtuns.


This is a war of ethnic estrangement, economic dispossession and geopolitical blowback. And it has been a long time coming.


The internal periphery of Pakistan comprising Balochistan, Sindh, parts of southern Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was never integrated into the state in any meaningful sense. As Anatol Lieven observes in his comprehensive, scholarly (and overly generous) work ‘Pakistan: A Hard Country,’ (2011) the provincial identities of Pakistan - Sindhi, Baloch, Pashtun, Mohajir – are not the products of centuries-old national consciousness, like the Czechs or Poles under the Habsburg Empire. Rather, they are brittle constructs, shaped by tribal affiliation, religious sub-sects and regional inequality. Ironically, so too is the Pakistani state itself, an edifice of artificial unity held together less by national cohesion than by fear of fragmentation.


Balochistan, the most resource-rich and population-poor of Pakistan’s provinces, is a case study in this contradiction. Despite being the source of most of Pakistan’s natural gas and mineral wealth, it remains the most neglected region. Roads are sparse, schools barely function, and electricity is intermittent. In Quetta, army cantonments gleam beside dusty slums. In Gwadar, promised as a crown jewel in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), locals are banned from fishing near their own shores.


The gas fields around Sui, long a vital source of Pakistan’s energy, have yielded little benefit to the Bugti tribe in whose territory they lie, igniting recurring waves of militancy. Now, attention has turned to the vast copper and gold reserves under development at RekoDiq.


Strategic ambition further complicates matters. Pakistan has long dreamed of becoming an energy transit corridor. The Gwadar port itself, built by the Chinese at Islamabad’s behest, was meant to transform Balochistan’s fortunes. But its development has instead provoked bitter resentment among the Baloch, who accuse the state of flooding the province with outsiders and shutting locals out of the spoils. The government claims otherwise, pointing out that many tribesmen profited by selling land.


Pakistan’s military elite has long justified its authoritarian dominance by invoking the existential threat posed by India, especially in Kashmir. Over time, this obsession with Kashmir mutated into a strategic doctrine that saw proxy warfare and militant sponsorship as legitimate instruments of statecraft. The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) has forged ties with jihadist outfits from Lashkar-e-Taiba to Jaish-e-Mohammed to creating a vast, murky ecosystem of militancy.


First, many of these jihadist networks turned rogue with some like the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) targeting Pakistan itself. Others exported their ideology into Pakistan’s cities, fomenting sectarian violence and radicalism. More insidiously, the state’s militarised approach to Kashmir emboldened it to adopt similar heavy-handedness against domestic dissent.


Crackdowns in Balochistan became the norm. In Sindh, the Sindhudesh movement was met with raids and disappearances. Mohajir activists in Karachi were silenced. Pashtun civil rights movements like the PTM were accused of treason. Each time, the Pakistan’s Punjabi Muslim elite have resorted to the same playbook it used in Kashmir and each time, the response has grown only more hostile.


Sindh’s simmering discontent rarely grabs headlines like Balochistan’s insurgency. But the grievances run deep. As Lieven notes, even seemingly straightforward development projects like the Thar coal reserves remain stalled for years due to friction between the Sindh provincial government and the federal authorities in Islamabad. The reason is a fear that any strong assertion of provincial autonomy might trigger a wave of Sindhi nationalism strong enough to fracture the Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP).


Many Sindhis see the state as a Punjabi-dominated entity with the military viewed as an external imposition. Mohajirs, migrants from India who settled in Sindh post-Partition, have their own history of political alienation, especially after the state’s clampdown on the MQM in the 1990s and again in recent years. Karachi, Sindh’s teeming metropolis, has witnessed intermittent ethnic riots between Sindhis, Mohajirs, Punjabis and Pashtuns, each group battling over territory and jobs.


Yet, paradoxically, Karachi is also a symbol of Pakistan’s complex unity. It is home to more Pathans than Peshawar, more Baloch than Quetta, and as many Punjabis as Lahore’s outer suburbs. Here, the dreams of nationalism often collide with the demands of daily survival. But today, even this fragile equilibrium is being tested as rising inflation, police brutality and state overreach grind away at civic trust.


If Pakistan survives as a nation-state, it will be only because Punjab wills it so (if it has will that is). This identification with the idea of Pakistan makes many Punjabis staunch defenders of national unity. But it also blinds them to the resentment they engender elsewhere.


What Pakistan did in Kashmir to ‘bleed’ India has now come home to roost. The same logic of militarised nationalism, the same disdain for local autonomy, the same demonisation of dissent are now routine in Balochistan, Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.


For many in Balochistan and Sindh, the ‘Kashmir Banega Pakistan’ slogans ring hollow. They see a state that invokes self-determination for Kashmiris but denies it at home. A state that champions development in Muzaffarabad while ignoring Gwadar. One that tolerates tribal autonomy in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa only so long as it doesn’t challenge the military’s writ.


But the façade is today cracking rapidly. As Pakistan’s economy teeters and international scrutiny mounts, the centre cannot hold. Pakistan’s greatest threat today is that its dream of a unified Islamic nation is faltering, long undone by the realities of ethnic fragmentation, economic disparity and political repression.


While Baloch tribes that settled in Sindh and Punjab centuries ago have produced two presidents in form of Farooq Leghari and Asif Zardari, this elite success has done little for Balochistan itself. Most Baloch remain marginalised, caught between a crumbling tribal hierarchy and a state that governs by neglect.


As Lieven observes in his work, modern Baloch nationalism is shaped as much by myth as by memory. Mir Chakar’s short-lived confederacy in the 15th century and the 17th-century Khanate of Kalat serve as totems of a lost sovereignty. Baloch nationalists insist Kalat was a quasi-independent entity akin to Nepal, and not merely a princely state like those integrated into India and Pakistan post-1947. The Pakistani state disagrees and has often unleashed to back its claim.


A significant portion of ethnic Baloch live across the frontier in Iran, where the Sunni-majority population suffers under the Shia theocracy. This has led to calls for a ‘Greater Balochistan’ encompassing parts of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, says Lieven. The Iranian Baloch insurgent group Jundallah has operated with support from tribes straddling the Pakistani border - smugglers, gunrunners and middlemen in a heroin pipeline stretching from Afghanistan to the Gulf. Islamabad and Tehran alike suspect that Western intelligence has flirted with Jundallah to pressure Iran over its nuclear ambitions.


But allegiances in this arid borderland are fluid: the same routes used for heroin and insurgents also carry weapons and recruits to the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Pakistan’s treatment of the Baloch has lacked both imagination and generosity. And in a region where tribal memory stretches back centuries, injustices are not easily forgotten.

Comments


bottom of page