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...

min read

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.)

Why Gilgit-Baltistan Belongs to India?

Correspondent
Feb 11, 2025
3 min read

Updated: Feb 12, 2025

For too long, a vital part of India’s history has been treated as an afterthought. It’s time to reclaim the narrative, and the land.

For much of independent India’s history, Gilgit-Baltistan, the mountainous region that legally belongs to India but remains under Pakistan’s unlawful control, has been neglected in public discourse. While New Delhi has long asserted that the entire territory of Jammu and Kashmir including Gilgit-Baltistan is an inalienable part of India, in recent years, a slow but deliberate shift has taken place. Since the resurgence of the BJP under PM Modi in 2014, India is no longer content with simply reiterating its claim but is making it known, forcefully and repeatedly, that Gilgit-Baltistan is an integral part of its national identity.

Pakistan’s illegal occupation of Gilgit-Baltistan dates back to 1947, when British military officers, aligned with Pakistan, orchestrated the region’s separation from the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. The accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh and ratified by India’s Parliament, making it legally binding under international law. The United Nations Security Council resolution of 1948, which called for a plebiscite in the entire region, was predicated on Pakistan withdrawing its troops first - something it never did. Instead, it consolidated its hold on Gilgit-Baltistan, systematically stripping its people of political agency, economic opportunity and fundamental rights.

India’s vigorous diplomatic protest against Pakistan’s Supreme Court decision in 2020 to conduct elections in Gilgit-Baltistan is part of this renewed assertion. The BJP government, unlike its predecessors, has not been shy about calling out Pakistan’s transgressions, nor has it hesitated to frame Gilgit-Baltistan as a cause that India must reclaim, not just rhetorically, but as part of its long-term strategic vision.

Indeed, much of Pakistan’s recent manoeuvring regarding Gilgit-Baltistan stems from its own anxieties. The region, which is home to key segments of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), is essential to Pakistan’s economic and strategic ambitions. Pakistan fears that India’s growing assertiveness could complicate its grip over the region. For decades, it has sought to present itself as the benevolent overseer of Gilgit-Baltistan, yet the region remains politically disenfranchised, economically underdeveloped and socially repressed. While Pakistan claims to uphold the right of self-determination, it has denied Gilgit-Baltistan’s residents meaningful representation and has subjected them to military rule, sectarian crackdowns and enforced demographic changes designed to dilute local ethnic identities.

Dissatisfaction with Pakistan has been simmering for years. Local protests against Pakistan’s exploitation of the region’s natural resources, particularly its hydropower and minerals, have grown more vocal.

The resurgence of Gilgit-Baltistan in India’s political and media discourse has been dismissed by critics as mere ‘electoral rhetoric’ or a tool for the BJP to bolster its nationalist credentials. But such dismissals fail to grasp that India’s renewed focus on Gilgit-Baltistan is about correcting a historical wrong.

The Congress, which dominated Indian politics for much of the post-independence period, largely avoided raising the issue out of a misplaced desire to avoid exacerbating tensions with Pakistan. The BJP, by contrast, has made it a point to remind both its domestic audience and the international community that the fight for Jammu and Kashmir does not end at the Line of Control.

Beijing’s heavy investment in the region, particularly through CPEC, has made it a crucial link in China’s Belt and Road Initiative. By asserting its claims more forcefully, India is not just challenging Pakistan’s occupation but sending a message to China that its encroachments will not go unchallenged. The 2019 revocation of Article 370, which fully integrated Jammu and Kashmir into India’s constitutional framework, was a precursor to this broader recalibration. If that move demonstrated India’s willingness to reshape the status quo in Kashmir, its stance on Gilgit-Baltistan suggests that the next chapter in this story has yet to be written.

For too long, Gilgit-Baltistan has been treated as a footnote in the larger Kashmir dispute. But history has a way of asserting itself. The question is not whether India should reclaim it, but when.