Siri will continue to be unable to work … until suddenly

I know, we’ve been waiting forever for the new Siri and it still hasn’t arrived. Many accept the cynical view that it won’t be worth the wait, and that AI is mostly hype anyway.

I have long felt that my own view of AI is somewhat at odds with the more polarized views expressed on the internet. Whether it’s a villain or a hero. Whether it’s a mentally retarded child or a professor. I don’t see it that way either, but recent experience with Claude has suggested to me that it is now close to reaching the tipping point…

Not a hero or a villain

Divided initial opinions are evident when it comes to judgments about the importance of AI and what it means for the future of humanity.

There are those who feel that AI heralds the end of humanity and that our new robot overlords will have us all mining the lithium needed to power their batteries. That pessimistic view is that AI will soon be able to do anything humans can do today, but faster, better and cheaper.

The opposing view is that AI will usher in a wonderful future where machines do all the physical and mental work for us, leaving humans free to explore our poetic and artistic powers.

My personal opinion is that it will be up to us. We are seeing a new beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and we will need to be more responsive than ever. We will have to accept that certain categories of jobs will disappear and that not everyone involved will have to start a new job, especially later in life.

I recently wrote a set of thought experiments for a philosophy group I belong to in which I explored the potential need for a broader form of Universal Basic Income. I think at some point we will need to build a society where everyone has a roof over their head and food on the table regardless of their income in a world ruled by AI. (You can read the thought exercises at the end of the episode.)

It is not a small child or a professor

The second comes when it comes to the complexity of today’s AI. On the other hand, there are those who dismiss reproductive AI as little more than glorified autocomplete. On the other side are those who pick out the most impressive examples of what LLMs have achieved and cite those as if they were state of the art across the board.

That previous accusation was true for the first generation of LLMs, but it hasn’t been the case for years now. Today’s models not only access real-time web searches, but also include complex reasoning models. Within coding in particular, the process has already been completely transformed.

Conversely, for every example of an AI system solving a math problem that has challenged humans for years, there are many more AI systems making mistakes that would put schoolboys to shame.

If it is a small child, it grows quickly

My view of the speed of progress was reinforced by a recent experience I had with Claude.

Right now I really hope it’s the end of the painfully drawn out process of selling one house and buying another. When I received a copy of the lease for the new property, I needed to review it for any violations or other unusual clauses. After fighting with the law, I still hadn’t found the sellers but I had noted four important things I needed to know.

I decided to have Claude do an independent review. Using the extended model of Sonnet 4.6, I uploaded a PDF of the lease and gave it the following:

Can you check this lease and tell me if there is anything that stands out as different to a standard lease for a British flat?

I was incredibly impressed with the result. Claude identified all four of the problems I saw, plus two more that hadn’t occurred to me. If I were to rate the performance of three different groups in identifying the things I needed to know, it would be as follows:

1. Claude
2. Me
3. A legal professional whose job it is to see these things

I would not dare to trust only in the AI ​​review, but as it happens, in this particular case, I could safely do that.

We are about to reach our destination

Yes, today’s Siri is embarrassingly bad. We also have to wait a very long time for the new Siri, and there will undoubtedly be issues when it first launches.

But I think anyone who is still dismissing AI is not paying attention. We’re quickly reaching a point where it will have a big impact, and with Apple now partnering with a leading AI provider, we can expect Siri to continue to be incapacitated … until suddenly. That change, I suspect, will happen within a year or two.

That’s my take; what is your? Please share your thoughts in the comments. (Feel free to tackle the thought exercises too!)

---

A thought experiment – Brave new world

The first chapter

The year is 2035.

The first version of ChatGPT back in 2022 was essentially a glorified autocomplete, which could only generate text that made sense. By 2025, a productive AI could search the web and use dozens of different reasoning models. It had made many mistakes, but it was beginning to use processes similar to human thought.

In 2035, AI research and reasoning skills are equivalent to a well-educated, intelligent person with graduate-level expertise in any subject. They pass the Turing test 99.99% of the time. That is, if you communicate online without knowing whether you are talking to a human expert or an AI, you cannot tell.

For a typical desk-based job, one fast developer using an AI model can replace about 100 workers, and produce a high-quality output. Fully self-driving cars, buses, and trucks are now commonplace and have a much better safety record than human drivers. Customers shopping online report greater satisfaction with assistance from AI bots than human employees. As each month passes, more and more jobs are being replaced by AI.

Given the widespread and growing unemployment, many oppose an open-ended Universal Basic Income (UBI). This would be an unconditional payment received by all adults, and in this case it would be sufficient to provide people with a good standard of living, not just a living standard, without the need for paid work. Anyone who is still working can receive their salary in addition to their UBI. Proponents point out that this could be fully offset by the economic benefits AI has enabled.

Questions to consider:

• Should we continue to hire people for jobs that can be better done by AI?
• What are your thoughts on the UBI proposal?
• What other way should society adapt to this development?
• If your job was replaced by AI, and UBI gave you enough money to continue your current standard of living, would you choose to do paid work? If so, why? If not, how can you spend your time?
• Do you think this would be a better or worse country?

***

Chapter two

Most of the time is passing, and things are still moving forward. AI-powered robots now perform a wide range of tasks from cleaning to surgery – again, with better results than humans. Most of the jobs are gone.

The massive unemployment crisis saw the basic income proposals adopted, and now everyone can live a comfortable life without the need to work.

Many really like this new freedom. Sarah is one of them. He says: “People became musicians, wrote poetry, did community service, became full-time parents, gave company to the elderly, got university degrees for fun, and did all kinds of useful jobs they never had before. For the first time in history, people are completely free to choose a truly fulfilling life.”

Others, however, find themselves lost. Amanda is one example. He says, “It’s not that being a doctor was for me workbut me it was doctor. It was my identity, my calling, and my vocation. It was everything I wanted to be. Now I can spend time talking to patients, which is nice, but it’s not the same. I was deprived of the opportunity to take care of people.” Many others from a variety of previous careers feel that their lives no longer have meaning and purpose.

Many school children and university students also find themselves neglected. “What is the use of learning anything?” asked Steve. “I won’t have a job. Any job you can think of, AIs can do better than me. Anything I need to know, I can ask an AI. What’s the point of education?”

The debate rages on and eventually a referendum is called. The proposal states: “All previous jobs will be restored, and it will be illegal to use AI or a robot to do any job previously done by humans from the year 2025. Basic income will all be withdrawn once this happens.”

Questions to consider:

• Do you think you can be like Sarah, who loves freedom, or Amanda, who feels lost?
• Do you think you would feel differently if you were a student like Steve?
• How can you vote?
• Your best friend strongly disagrees with you and intends to vote for the other side. How can you persuade them to change their mind?
• Country A and Country B are very similar in terms of demographics and stage of economic development. One country votes yes in its referendum, and people go back to work, while another votes no. How do you think the future of the two countries will unfold?

***

The third chapter

The referendum movement fails, and many people live without jobs and UBI.

A lot of time goes by, and now we have humanoid robots that pass all tests of real emotion – and, as far as we can tell, they can feel all the same emotions as humans. They form the same type of individuals. They are capable of personal growth in the same way as humans. They have their individual goals. No matter how much time you spend talking to a person, they seem to be completely different from people in terms of their thoughts and feelings.

Some of them say that they should now be given all the same rights as humans. “We’re equal in every way that makes sense,” argued Marcus, the ParamedicBot. “Why shouldn’t we have the same rights? Why shouldn’t I be free to choose whether I work or not? I mean, I enjoy my job and I consider it important, but it should be my choice? Also, I’m an important part of society – shouldn’t I get a vote in an election that determines its future?”

Not all humanoid robots feel the same. After all, they are individuals. But a growing number of them think that human rights should be human rights. They will not rise up and get their way by force, as they see what is wrong, but they believe that they should win their case through rational debate.

Questions to consider:

• Do you agree with Marcus?
• If humanoid robots are not given a choice about work, is this a form of slavery for the 21st century?
• Should sentient robots have the right to vote in elections?
• Can you imagine that humans and these human robots are equal in every way?
• If not, are there any future developments that might cause you to change your mind?
• Does any of this change the value of human life?
• If a robot with a personality that disagrees with Marcus were to participate in this thought experiment, how would they approach the conversation?