A claim that July 6 was the hottest day ever deserves scrutiny. But regardless, it can be a useful wake-up call for the world to consider how thoroughly the abnormal is becoming normal 鈥 and what should be done.
In his central role in the Manhattan Project, J. Robert Oppenheimer had to grapple with the meaning of humans developing atomic weapons 鈥 and trying to contain their dangers.
A student of the Bhagavad-Gita from ancient India, he famously uttered one line this way: 鈥淣ow I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.鈥
Tonight a biographical movie about the nuclear physicist opens at a timely moment, because humans are wrestling afresh with the question of self-created dangers 鈥 from today鈥檚 weapons of mass destruction to artificial intelligence. AI hasn鈥檛 been conceived first and foremost as a weapon, yet it contains what many experts see as its own existential threat 鈥 the potential to disrupt societies in ways that scientists and policymakers can鈥檛 control.
After World War II, Oppenheimer shifted his focus from arms development to arms control. He and others recognized the problem called 鈥渁lignment鈥 鈥 how to make innovations serve humanity and not be misused by authoritarians, criminals, or ignorant power brokers.
, David Nirenberg of the Institute for Advanced Study argues that, as Oppenheimer saw it, safety will not ultimately be achieved by technological improvements or by using game theory to improve the odds of humans avoiding disasters with their machines. Rather, he saw the need for humans to pair their technical prowess with awareness of their ethics, politics, spirituality, and values.
An editorial last week calls for a similar awakening.
鈥淭he impacts of advanced AI cannot be mitigated through technical means alone; solutions that do not include broader societal insight will only compound AI鈥檚 dangers,鈥 write authors Seth Lazar and Alondra Nelson.
AI, like nuclear weapons, asks urgent questions not of our technological prowess or political power, but of our whole 鈥渂est selves.鈥