VR Pioneer · Musician · Author JARON LANIER
Who Owns the Future? · Dawn of the New Everything: Encounters with Reality & Virtual Reality · Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now

AI is obviously the dominant topic in tech lately, and I think occasionally there's AI that's nonsense, and occasionally there's AI that's great. I love finding new proteins for medicine and so on. I don't think we serve ourselves well when we put our own technology up as if it were a new God that we created. I think we're really getting a little too full of ourselves to think that.

When we do that, I think we confuse ourselves too easily. This goes back to Alan Turing, the main founder of computer science, who had this idea of the Turing test. In the test, you can't tell whether the computer has gotten more human-like or the human has gotten more computer-like. People are very prone to becoming more computer-like. When we're on social media, we let ourselves be guided by the algorithms, so we start to become dumb in the way the algorithms want us to. You see that all the time. It's really degraded our psychologies and our society.

A Convesation with ANIL SETH · Co-director of the Sussex Centre for Consciousness Science · Canadian Institute for Advanced Research Program on Brain, Mind & Consciousness

This is a point in philosophy that the world as it is can never be directly apprehended by our minds. We are shielded from it by what's called a sensory veil. There are, for instance, no such thing as colors that are out there. As the artist Cezanne said, "The colors are where the brain and the universe meet." And color is, I think, a really good example because it is, in a sense, less than what's there because our eyes are only sensitive to three wavelengths of this huge electromagnetic spectrum, which goes all the way from x-rays and gamma rays to radio waves. And we live in a tiny, thin slice of that reality. But then out of those three wavelengths we experience our brains generate many more than three colors and almost an infinite palette of colors. So there's no sense in which our perception could ever reveal the world as it really is, that it reveals the world in a way that's very useful for us as organisms hell-bent on continuing to live and to survive. 

A Conversation with LIAD MUDRIK
Neuroscientist · Principal Investigator Liad Mudrik Lab · Tel Aviv University

So when I say that I am a conscious creature, I mean that I don't only analyze information about the world, or not only even respond to the world because you can think about, your thermostat response to the world, but when I sense the world, I don't only process information. I also have a qualitative experience, adopting Thomas Nagel's famous title of his paper. It feels like something in his case to be a bat. In our case, to be me. It feels like something to drink coffee, right? So the question is what allows us as human beings not only to process information but also to experience it? And this is what we are trying to understand, basically. And I should say, I said us as human beings, but I think that animals also have such conscious experience.

So to what extent does our cognition affect perception itself? And I belong to those researchers who think that it does. We are affected by what we expect to see. And sometimes we even perceive the expected as opposed to the world as it is. That also pertains to day-to-day life, to politics, to the reality you construct for yourself. So the brain is an amazing, amazing piece of machinery. And one of the things that it does best is to create these narratives. into which we project ourselves. So it creates a model of the world.

A Conversation with SUSAN SCHNEIDER · Founding Director · Center for the Future Mind · Florida Atlantic University · Fmr. NASA Chair at NASA · Fmr. Distinguished Scholar at US Library of Congress

So it's hard to tell exactly what the dangers are, but that's certainly one thing that we need to track that beings that are vastly intellectually superior to other beings may not respect the weaker beings, given our own past. It's really hard to tell exactly what will happen. The first concern I have is with surveillance capitalism in this country. The constant surveillance of us because the US is a surveillance capitalist economy, and it's the same elsewhere in the world, right? With Facebook and all these social media companies, things have just been going deeply wrong. And so it leads me to worry about how the future is going to play out. These tech companies aren't going to be doing the right thing for humanity. And this gets to my second worry, which is how's all this going to work for humans exactly? It's not clear where humans will even be needed in the future.

The Lives of Billionaires Comic Artist & Author DARRYL CUNNINGHAM on Making Complex Subjects Simple

No one should be a billionaire because it's damaging. There's a certain level of wealth that's damaging to a country. Billionaires have so much wealth that they have enormous political power, which is undemocratic. There should be a ceiling on wealth. I have nothing against people becoming millionaires or even multi-millionaires. But multi-billionaires are incredibly bad for all of us. If you have so much money that you can buy an entire political party, that's a thing that shouldn't exist.

Economist · Oxford & King’s College London
Author of Growth: A Reckoning · A World Without Work

We have a choice to change the nature of growth. How we can have growth that is more respectful of place, doesn’t cause as much damage to the environment, doesn't lead to as large inequalities in society, doesn’t disrupt politics, doesn't undermine the availability of good work? We ought to pursue this morally enriched GDP measure which better reflects what we really value and care about as a society.

A Conversation with RISTO UUK · Head of EU Policy & Research · FUTURE OF LIFE INSTITUTE

The Future of Life Institute has been working on AI governance-related issues for the last decade. We're already over 10 years old, and our mission is to steer very powerful technology away from large-scale harm and toward very beneficial outcomes. You could think about any kind of extreme risks from AI, all the way to existential or extinction risk, the worst kinds of risks and the benefits. You can think about any kind of large benefits that humans could achieve from technology, all the way through to utopia, right? Utopia is the biggest benefit you can get from technology. Historically, that has meant we have focused on climate change, for example, and the impact of climate change. We have also focused on bio-related risks, pandemics and nuclear security issues. If things go well, we will be able to avoid these really bad downsides in terms of existential risk, extinction risks, mass surveillance, and really disturbing futures. We can avoid that very harmful side of AI or technology, and we can achieve some of the benefits.

A Conversation with MELVIN VOPSON · Physicist · Author · Co-founder & CEO of the Information Physics Institute

These ideas go as far back as Ancient Greece, which basically gave birth to two lines of thinking, two ideologies, materialism and idealism. And the idealist thinkers like Plato regarded reality as a projection of our minds, as something that is not real. And the only thing that is real is our consciousness and our minds and everything else around us is just constructs of our proception and projections. And that was a philosophy that was opposed to materialism, which regards the world as in a materialistic way, made up of atoms and matter and our minds are a product of these chemical reactions and the matter is coming together and forming our minds and consciousness. And everything in the world exists regardless of our consciousness or our minds and the universe is there and it's a materialistic view of the world. So these are two competing ideologies, and this is actually how we see the world today in a materialistic way.

A Conversation with WENDY H. WONG
Author · Professor of Political Science at University of British Columbia

One of the things that we need to remember is that we are data stakeholders and not data subjects. We're often called data subjects if you look at the way legislation is written and tech companies talk about the users of their technology as data subjects. Being a subject casts this sort of '“you can't help but have this happen to you” effect. But we're actually data stakeholders for the reason that data cannot be created without us. If companies were incentivized to follow data minimization for example, where they only collect the data they need, that would change the way we interact with digital technologies.

Evolution, AI and the Five Breakthroughs That Made Our Brains
A Conversation with MAX BENNETT Author · Cofounder & CEO of Alby · Fmr. Cofounder & CPO of Bluecore

So, modern neuroscientists are questioning if there really is one consistent limbic system. But usually when we're looking at the limbic system, we're thinking about things like emotion, volition, and goals. And those types of things, I would argue reinforcement learning algorithms, at least on a primitive level, we already have because the way that we get them to achieve goals like play a game of go and win is we give them a reward signal or a reward function. And then we let them self-play and teach themselves based on maximizing that reward. But that doesn't mean that they're self-aware, doesn't mean that they're experiencing anything at all. There's a fascinating set of questions in the AI community around what's called the reward hypothesis, which is how much of intelligent behavior can be understood through the lens of just trying to optimize a reward signal. We are more than just trying to optimize reward signals. We do things to try and reinforce our own identities. We do things to try and understand ourselves. These are attributes that are hard to explain from a simple reward signal, but do make sense. And other conceptions of intelligence like Karl Friston's active inference where we build a model of ourselves and try and reinforce that model.

What will the future look like? What are the risks and opportunities of AI? What role can we play in designing the future we want to live in? In this first episode of our new channel, philosophers, futurists, AI experts, science fiction authors, activists, and lawyers reflect on AI, technology, and the Future of Humanity..

Organizer · Speaker · Professor at Seattle University's School of Law
Author of Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and the Limits of Law
Mutual Aid, Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next)

I want to see movements that embolden our tactics. Like people blocking oil pipelines all over the world. That's what's required now. Asking endlessly from the dominant system to treat us fairly doesn't work. And this frustrating kind of endless appeal and hoping maybe we can get it to work this time doesn't work. And the clock is ticking, especially on ecological collapse. We need to save each other's lives and act.

on how Uber, Lyft, Instacart, DoorDash and others use algorithmic wage discrimination against their workers

In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with Professor Veena Dubal about how such companies have exported globally a technique of algorithmic wage discrimination that pays workers based on data to which they have no access. Owners dangle bonuses before workers but take away work from them as they draw close to achieving their targets; they use psychological tricks derived from video games to create a casino-like environment where the house always wins. Dubal urges us not to fall into the trap of competing against the house, but back to “good old-fashioned organizing.”

A Conversation with Author ALLEN STEELE
Winner of the Hugo · Asimov's Readers & Locus Awards
Served on the Board of Directors of Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America

I'm really very glad. I was happy to see that within my lifetime that the prospects of not just Mars, but in fact interstellar space is being taken seriously. I've been at two conferences where we were talking about building the first starship within this century. One of my later books, Arkwright, is about such a project. I saw that Elon Musk is building Starship One, I wish him all the best. And I envy anybody who goes.

I wish I were a younger person and in better health. Somebody asked me some time ago, would you go to Mars? And I said, “I can't do it now. I've got a bum pancreas, and I'm 65 years old, and I'm not exactly the prime prospect for doing this. If you asked me 40 years ago would I go, I would have said: in a heartbeat!” I would gladly leave behind almost everything. I don't think I'd be glad about leaving my wife and family behind, but I'd be glad to go live on another planet, perhaps for the rest of my life, just for the chance to explore a new world, to be one of the settlers in a new world. We've got to be careful about how we do this. And we've got to be careful, particularly about the rationale of the people who are doing this.

Writers, Philosophers & Thought Leaders Speak Out

How can we be more engaged global citizens? How do we fight for truth and protect democracy in a post-truth world? What influence do billionaires have on politics, journalism, and the technology that shapes our lives? Deborah Cahn, Daniel Susskind, Carlos Moreno, Lee McIntyre, Julian Lennon, Darryl Cunningham, and Arash Abizadeh on the future of democracy.

Artists, Philosophers, Economists & Scientists discuss the Future

How can we shape technology’s impact on society? How do social media algorithms influence our democratic processes and personal well-being? Can AI truly emulate human creativity? And how will its pursuit of perfection change the art we create?

A Call to Regulate the Attention Market and Prevent Algorithmic Emotional Governance

The fact that technologies are being used and combined to capture our attention is concerning. This is currently being done with no limitations and no regulations. That's the main problem. Attention is a very private resource. No one should be allowed to extract it from us by exploiting what we know about the human mind and how it functions, including its weaknesses. We wrote this paper as a call to regulate the attention market and prevent algorithmic emotional governance.

A Conversation with Neuroscientist DR. FERNANDO GARCÍA-MORENO

I think creative thinking is rooted in different parts of the brain. I believe that creativity is mostly a cultural expression of how our brains react to the world. It is our culture and our lives that make our brains creative in different manners. Even though you and I have very similar brains containing exactly the same cell types, we have evolved alongside each other for 300 million years. We share a lot of features, yet we express our ideas through creative thinking differently. In my opinion, this is cultural evolution—an expression of how our brains have evolved throughout our lives, how we learn, and what experiences we have over time: what we read, the movies we see, and the people we talk to.

We are working in the lab to understand this moment in development, which is called phylotypic. This is something that has been known for over a hundred years. When you see many vertebrate embryos at this early embryonic time point, all embryos look very, very similar. We are extrapolating these ideas to the brain. We have seen that at this time point, the phylotypic period, all brains of these species are very simple but very closely related. We share the same features with a fish or with a gecko or with any other mammalian species at this early time point. We have the same brain with the same genes active and the same cell types involved in it.

How to Dissent and Defy Effectively
A Conversation with APA Award-winning Author TODD B. KASHDAN
Leading Authority on Well-being, Curiosity, Courage & Resilience

We're really talking about principled rebels. And when we talk about insubordination, we're talking about most of us live in these social hierarchies, and there's the idea, this started in the military and still goes on, where if someone at a lower rank questions or challenges a command or a norm that someone of a higher rank, that's considered an act of insubordination. And one of the main problems of that, I think anyone who's listening can acknowledge, is it depends on the quality of the idea of the person who's raising the question. I just realized there was this whole body of literature on minority influence that no one had put together into a book for the general public, and considering the racial reckoning that occurred during COVID-19, the extra attention to diversity, to disadvantaged groups, every moment of society, it just feels like it's more and more relevant of what I've been working on.

in Sam Altman's OPEN AI
A Conversation with KAREN HAO

My book is called Empire of AI because I'm trying to articulate this argument and illustrate that these companies operate exactly like empires of old. I highlight four features that essentially encapsulate the three things you read. However, I started talking about it in a different way after writing the book.

The four features are: they lay claim to resources that are not their own, which is the centralization of resources; they exploit an extraordinary amount of labor, both in the development of the technology and the fact that they're producing labor-automating technologies that then suppress workers' ability to bargain for better rights; they monopolize knowledge production, which comes when they centralize talent.