For years, Time magazine has declared and featured a person of the year on its cover. Then in 1995, the editorial board chose the PC as the person of the year. It was a good joke. The author of these ‘Ekonomalije’ liked it, and since then, in columns published in Večernji list and Poslovni tjednik, and for the last eighteen years in Lider, I have been declaring a ‘person’, actually an occurrence, that has marked the outgoing year in an economic-business sense. ‘Persons’ have included, for example, corruption, competition, a frenzied stock market, jobs, apathy, and so on.
This year, 2023, the choice was made without much competition, falling on ChatGPT, an achievement in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) that is rapidly breaking down barriers between cloud algorithms and artificial intelligence that operates like a human brain. And better than it. If in 1995 the declaration of the PC as person of the year was an innovative editorial exaggeration, in 2023 we can no longer be sure whether the AI chatbot, with which hundreds of millions of people communicate as if it were an almost omniscient interlocutor, is a non-person or is just about to become a self-aware person.
Altman’s Fear
In the competition for person/phenomenon of the year were the introduction of the euro in Croatia, rising interest rates, and deglobalization. But with the emergence of artificial intelligence in the form of ChatGPT among the general public and the exponential growth of the application of this form of artificial intelligence, from writing seminar papers to applications in many businesses, no other phenomenon could compare. When we add the warnings from those involved in the development of artificial intelligence, like Sam Altman, the recently ousted CEO of OpenAI, who believes that artificial intelligence could have more devastating consequences for humanity than the invention of the atomic bomb, there was no dilemma about the (non)person that most strongly marked 2023.
—
—
The rule that futurists follow states that if there are multiple scenarios in development, the worst one should be taken. Or at least not ignored. This is also true for the exponential development of artificial intelligence. On one hand, it can save humanity through future control of human contributions to the already very concerning climate changes. But on the other hand, at the moment if/when it becomes self-aware, artificial intelligence may conclude that the human species is dangerous and unnecessary. Man, in the desire to become Homo deus, the creator of new species (according to author Yuval Noah Harari), can very easily create a species that will subjugate him. Just as the human species has exterminated or subjugated most other animal species on Earth over thousands of years. Why couldn’t the hunter become the hunted?
