That’s the theme of my latest Bloomberg column, and here’s part one:
Another big change is that AI will allow people, or very small teams, to run large projects. By directing AIs, they will be able to create think tanks, research centers or businesses. The productivity of small groups of people who are very good at guiding AIs will increase by an order of magnitude.
Philanthropists should consider giving more support to such people. Of course that is difficult, because currently there are no easy or obvious ways to measure those skills. But this is why generosity can play a useful role. Commercially oriented businesses may avoid making such investments, because of the risk and because the returns are uncertain. Philanthropists have no such financial needs.
And this point that is often overlooked:
Powerful AI capabilities also mean that the world can be a lot better in a very long time, say 40 years. Maybe there will be amazing new drugs that wouldn’t have happened, and because of that people can live 10 years longer. That increases the return – today – to correcting childhood diseases that are difficult to reverse. One example would be lead poisoning in children, which can lead to permanent intellectual disability. Another could be malnutrition. Addressing those issues was already a very good investment, but the brighter the world’s future looks, and the better our life prospects, the higher that return.
The flip side is that reversible problems should probably decrease in importance. If we can fix some problem today for $10 billion, maybe in 10 years – thanks to AI – we’ll be able to fix it for $5 billion. So it will be very important to find out which problems are truly irreversible. Philanthropists should focus on long-term horizons anyway, so they don’t have to worry too much about how long it will take for AI to make our world a very different place.
Recommended, interesting throughout.
Source link