Skip to main content

How can we be sure that AI will serve humanity rather than enslave it?


 

 

With the right "Alignment," AI can become a Leader in the Values Revolution. But AI Alignment will fail if we ignore the 35,000-year-old Human "Bug."

If you are concerned about AI Ethics and Safety, and about AI governance policy, then you probably know that the AI industry is obsessed with Alignment. We are trying to align Artificial Intelligence with "human values." But as I argue in my book, The Human Birth Defect, we are overlooking a catastrophic hardware-software mismatch in our own species.

🧠 The Hardware Failure (150,000 Years Ago):

The mutation that gave us our "Big Brain" created a genetic deficit in contentment producing chemicals. We were born into a state of chronic existential restlessness.

🏹 The Software Patch (35,000 Years Ago):

The "Genocidal Thrill" of the Neanderthal encounter and the subsequent slaughter of the Great Megafauna provided the brain with its first "chemical high." This created a violent, dominance-based Culture Universe that we are still trapped in today.

🚫 The AI Danger:

If we align AI with our Current Cultural Complex, we aren't aligning it with "humanity"—we are aligning it with a 35,000-year-old addiction to domination and tribalism.

✅ The Solution:

We must align AI with our Original Adaptation—the 115,000-year era of sharing and caring that preceded our cultural "Big Bang." AI’s true service is not "productivity," but Biological Restoration: helping the human brain find the peace it has been missing since the Pleistocene.

So, @SamAltman @DarioAmodei @Jan Leike let’s stop building a "Silicon Ego" and start building a tool for Human Value.

Read the full breakdown on Medium here: https://medium.com/@interpretivepoliticalscience/the-pleistocene-bug-why-human-culture-is-a-35-000-year-old-addiction-227db95b860f


William J. Kelleher, PhD

#AI #FutureOfWork #Anthropology #Neuroscience #HumanValue

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does Political Science Force Graduate Students into a Career of Irrelevancy?

Introduction       In a 2014 New York Times op ed, columnist Nicholas Kristof drew numerous defensive responses when he criticized political science for having very little “practical impact” in “the real world of politics.” [1] Rather than exercising civic leadership, political science has been most noticeably AWOL from public policy debates since WWII, he claims. And, in his view, there are “fewer public intellectuals on American university campuses today than a generation ago.” How does he account for this absence? Primarily, it is due to the academic interest in pursuing the quantitative approach in political science research. This kind of research is too often unintelligible to both the politically interested general public and the policy making community. Also, the “value neutrality” required for such studies prohibits advocacy. The pattern persists, in part, because graduate students must conform to the expectations of their professors, as a requirement ...
Post a Comment
Read more

RIP Prop 33 😭 What happened?

Why did Prop 33 lose in California? Here are three reasons, although there could be more:  1) Out of state billionaire real estate special interests, combined with in-state millionaire Landlord orgs, spent over $121,000,000 on telling scary falsehoods to Californians. Like, rent control will cause rents to go up, and affordable housing will disappear. They just needed to cause enough confusion about the meaning of Prop 33 to get the voters – even tenants! – to vote no.   2) As I explain in a vid on YouTube,* the California Legislative Analyst presented a biased and negative summary of Prop 33 in the Voter Guide. That was sent out to 22M Californians. For many voters, it was the one and only thing they would read about Prop 33. The law requires the Legislative Analyst to suggest the economic impact of a prop for both state and local gov – but only a negative view was given, and only for the state gov – “tens of millions” would be lost in tax revenues, it said. But renters w...
2 comments
Read more

If Political Science is Widely Regarded as Irrelevant to Real Politics, What Can be Done to Reverse that View?

Let Google AI Answer that Question with its Own Book Review: The main argument of William J. Kelleher's book,  Normative Political Science: An Exciting New Way to Do Poli Sci Research,  is that it is possible to scientifically measure the "operational goodness" of a political system. Rather than relying on subjective moral philosophy, Kelleher proposes a method that combines two established theories to provide an objective, data-driven evaluation.  Key components of the argument 1. Integration of established theories Kelleher's methodology is based on two frameworks: David Easton's Systems Theory: This theory conceptualizes a political system in terms of inputs, processes, and outputs. The system converts demands and support from the public into policies and decisions. Kelleher uses this as a "blueprint" for a political system. Robert S. Hartman's Value Science: This formal axiology provides a framework for meas...
Post a Comment
Read more