Recently, the vulgate seems to have exploded that artificial intelligence may soon put a large number of jobs at risk, somewhat across all sectors. It is scaremongering, but let’s say that AI is definitely transforming (this yes) the labor market, raising concerns about the possibility that it may replace some roles.The issue is important, and it was also raised by the association “Italian Women Journalists,” at the Roman conference with ministers and undersecretaries as well as teachers and referents the world of education and information in 2024.
The summary was that AI could indeed affect employment, and certainly we should learn to live with it and harness its potential. It is an irreversible process, so we better understand how the system works and make it effective for our future.
AI is particularly well suited for repetitive and mechanical tasks, such as factory production, warehouse management, and even some administrative functions.Industries such as logistics, manufacturing, retail, and even financial services are seeing increasing use of AI to improve efficiency. For example, cashiers could be replaced by automated payment systems, and automated production lines could reduce the need for workers by putting robots, androids, and clones in the place of people. This, undoubtedly, is now evident. Although some jobs may be eliminated, AI may also create new jobs. These, as extensively discussed at the conference, may include roles related to the development, maintenance and supervision of AI systems, as well as jobs that require skills that cannot be easily automated, such as creativity, critical thinking and empathy.
Man supplanted entirely by the machine? Will it really be possible?
“For what is the dreaded evolutionary technological drama to occur, that is, the machine supplanting man in higher tasks, at least one basic evolutionary scientific step must occur: perfect, or at least basic, knowledge of the concept of Intelligence.”
This is the opinion of two neuroscience experts working in epigenetic research and psycho-neuro immuno modulation, respectively: Dr. Giovanni Cozzolino and Dr. Sabrina Ulivi.
They are both researchers and scholars of the “Man” universe, and in their books and articles they have described the latest theories, and the latest studies on memory formation, as well as the genesis of the human cognitive process, as it appears in the light of the aforementioned theories.
According to the two researchers, “from this we draw the conclusion that we are still a long way from scientifically and empirically proving said theories, no matter how solidly scientifically based they may have arisen. The great enigma as to the nature of the substance of which memory, and human thought, is formed, therefore, places us far from conceiving of any technology capable of designing and constructing an artifact that would appreciably approximate the activities produced by man and his cognitive operation.” .
Recently, some studies conducted separately in different universities have frightened the theory that memory is essentially formed/supported by “energy fractals,” we want to talk about them:
“Fractal energy is ambient energy found in large quantities in the universal trans vacuum. It is commonly used as a source of electricity la where possible to channel it. In contrast, it is very difficult to capture and convert this into useful energy. However, fractal energy is infinitely renewable and essentially carbon neutral per se, so it is preferred, over other methods of energy generation.This is all we currently know about the reality of the fractal energy that constitutes memory, and the human cognitive process. That being said, to assume that even the very latest generation of computers can produce thought or memory approaching that of humans is far from reality, to say the least. Computers are built on the basis of silicon and this makes possible their enormous speed of computation based on binary mathematics (0/1)(Yes/No). But we are built on a carbon base which, in the piezoelectric nature of carbon, defines a virtually infinite number of possibilities for answers even if only considering the two possible extremes (0/1). As much as the latest technologies can assume very large binary memory stores, with innumerable even fractal computational possibilities both geometric and mathematical, they cannot be considered “intelligences” in any sense. Therefore, as Stephen Hawking had to say, “… The computer must consider itself a fast jerk …!”
And this stark statement we absolutely agree with.
Humans less intelligent than computers?
Experts point out that “some might object that even among humans there may be more cretinous subjects, that is, not as capable as a computer, but that would be a peculiarity and not the norm. Almost certainly this new technology will take the place of laborers or operators subjected to repetitive work, whether conceptual or manual, but this has happened in all eras in which a technology has supplanted humans in heavy or dangerous tasks. The use, therefore, of this new technology, which to date appears to us as a deus ex machina, will by no means supplant man in conceptually superior jobs or activities, nor in abstract and theorizing ones. Meanwhile, it will be very valuable support in secondary ones, it will be an aid in research when it is necessary to develop a long chain of experiments or complex chemical/mathematical analysis where time is long, and it will be a very valuable support in machine -tools, but it will remain a tool and that is all.”
Quantum computers? “It would be most dangerous for them to imagine delegating even minute percentages of decision-making processes to such machines; they would be playing in this case on mathematical processes with reduced or very reduced range with risks of even serious consequences. We will have to wait for the design of the future and futuristic “quantum computers,” which, in the intentions of lovers of the subjects inherent in cybernetic and computer science, should be made on a carbon base and on neurons generated in the laboratory on a human matrix. In this case, when they are imagined and designed we will be faced with another basic dilemma because we do not know whether we could still call them by the circumscribed term of machines. In 1974 at M.I.T. in Boston they tried to design with the then analog technology (thermionic valves, resistors, electrolytic capacitors, etc.) the brain of a rat. They were forced to stop when the design-level size of such a “calculator” (they had that name at the time) reached the size of the empire state bulding..! It is likely that if we designed a rat brain today with today’s technologies it would be tens or hundreds of thousands of times smaller in size.
But the fact remains that a human brain is quite different from a rat brain. So even leaving aside its size, how could such a thing be realized? Technological progress will reach this evolutionary level sooner or later, but the real question is: will our ethical, moral, cultural evolutionary level be at the same level ? Or will we end up self-extinguishing ourselves by delegating our existence on the planet to something else ? “
There is still time for this series of dilemmas to be posed to us by history, but it is not an infinite time, it will be necessary to seriously and quickly start thinking about it to deeply and carefully analyze this new AI world, using our intelligence , currently the only one on this planet.
“We will. This is what research and our role is for: to seek the truth and possible answers to something that today seems immense and perhaps not entirely understandable or wrong,” this is Cozzolino and Ulivi’s conclusion.
The article AI and the new frontiers comes from TheNewyorker.
