MIT Explains the 12 Possible Endings for AI — Transcript
Full transcript
- 0:00AI scientists warn that a few companies
- 0:02are on track to literally end life on
- 0:05Earth.
- 0:07So, surely this is the worst possible
- 0:10outcome, right?
- 0:13No. There actually much worse outcomes.
- 0:18Billionaires building AI like Elon Musk
- 0:21think that if AIs become smarter than
- 0:24humanity,
- 0:25We will be like a pet Labrador if we're
- 0:27lucky. We will be left behind by a lot.
- 0:30[music] So far below them in
- 0:31intelligence that it would be would be
- 0:32like, you know, a pet basically.
- 0:34>> Pet, that's what I was saying. Like a
- 0:35pet, like a pet.
- 0:36>> Yes, we'll be pets if we're lucky.
- 0:40But here's the worst part. Many AI
- 0:42scientists aren't fearing extinction.
- 0:45They're hoping for it.
- 0:47They hope smarter AIs will keep humans
- 0:50alive, captive, and studied like animals
- 0:54in a zoo.
- 0:55>> [music]
- 0:55>> Remember, this is what we currently do
- 0:57to less intelligent species. Okay, so if
- 1:00humans being kept in zoos is considered
- 1:02a good outcome, and extinction isn't the
- 1:06worst outcome, then what is? This video
- 1:10is based on a book called Life 3.0,
- 1:12where MIT professor Max Tegmark
- 1:14describes 12 possible futures. Some are
- 1:17paradise,
- 1:19some are nightmares,
- 1:20and some look like paradise until you
- 1:23try to escape.
- 1:25By the end of this video, you won't read
- 1:27the news the same way. Every headline
- 1:29becomes a clue about which future we're
- 1:31heading towards.
- 1:33We'll start with the most normal
- 1:35scenarios and finish with the weirdest.
- 1:38Starting with self-destruction.
- 1:42If the idea of humanity suddenly going
- 1:44extinct seems a bit far-fetched,
- 1:47consider this. 99.9%
- 1:50of species that have ever existed have
- 1:52gone extinct. Seriously, think about
- 1:54that. Extinction isn't rare, it's the
- 1:57default.
- 1:58The only question is when will we go
- 2:01extinct?
- 2:03Turns out there are plenty of ways
- 2:05humanity could kill itself even without
- 2:07superhuman AI.
- 2:08There is nuclear war, human created
- 2:11super pandemics, [music] and destroying
- 2:13the atmosphere and making Earth
- 2:14uninhabitable.
- 2:19The world had stockpiled 60,000 nuclear
- 2:22warheads before scientists even
- 2:24discovered the possibility of nuclear
- 2:27winter.
- 2:2863,000.
- 2:29And then scientists realized, "Oh, oops,
- 2:32if we actually use these, the resulting
- 2:34firestorms will blot [music] out the sun
- 2:37and most humans will starve and die."
- 2:40Oops.
- 2:42But the thing is, this almost happened
- 2:44during the Cold War multiple times. If
- 2:47people had actually followed their
- 2:48orders, we might all be dead right now.
- 2:51We were saved by only thanks to the
- 2:53courage of individual heroes. People
- 2:55like Vasili Arkhipov, who refused to
- 2:58authorize a nuclear launch during the
- 2:59Cuban Missile Crisis, or Stanislav
- 3:02Petrov, who correctly guessed that his
- 3:04early warning system was malfunctioning
- 3:07when it showed incoming American
- 3:08missiles.
- 3:10And get this, one time
- 3:12the US accidentally dropped four
- 3:15thermonuclear bombs on [music] Spain.
- 3:19And another time, a B-52 bomber broke
- 3:22apart dropping two nukes on North
- 3:24Carolina. Three out of four safety pins
- 3:27in one bomb broke. One tiny pin away
- 3:31from potentially killing millions.
- 3:32[music] There are literally dozens of
- 3:34close calls like this. It's honestly
- 3:36crazy that we got lucky so many times.
- 3:41But we might not be so lucky the next
- 3:43time.
- 3:44Oxford researcher Toby Ord estimates the
- 3:46risk [music] of extinction from human
- 3:48created pandemics is more than 30 times
- 3:51the risk of extinction [music] from
- 3:53nuclear war.
- 3:54We're already rolling dice on these
- 3:56scenarios daily, but all of these causes
- 3:58combined are still less likely than the
- 4:01extinction from AI. Toby Ord estimates
- 4:04that the risk of AI killing all humans
- 4:06is a hundred times more likely than
- 4:08extinction [music] from nuclear war.
- 4:12Interestingly, before the first nuclear
- 4:15test, scientists thought they might
- 4:17accidentally destroy [music] the world,
- 4:19but they thought the odds were very low
- 4:20because they knew enough physics
- 4:22>> [music]
- 4:22>> to actually do the calculations.
- 4:26AGIs, or artificial general
- 4:28intelligences, are far scarier than
- 4:30nukes because, contrary to what many
- 4:32think, we can't do these calculations.
- 4:37Next up, conquerors.
- 4:39>> [music]
- 4:40>> AI scientists worry that if AI becomes
- 4:43more capable than us, it will take over,
- 4:45just like the conquistadors did to the
- 4:47Aztecs [music] and Incas.
- 4:50Usually, when people with more advanced
- 4:52technology encounter people with more
- 4:54primitive technology, doesn't work out
- 4:57well for the primitives. I don't think
- 4:59anyone's ultimately going to have
- 5:00control over digital superintelligence
- 5:03any more than, say, uh a chimp would
- 5:05have control over humans.
- 5:07>> Long term,
- 5:09uh the AI is going to be in charge, to
- 5:10be totally frank, not humans. And
- 5:13Geoffrey Hinton, the godfather of AI and
- 5:15Nobel Prize winner, quit his prestigious
- 5:18job at Google [music] so he could speak
- 5:20freely about this.
- 5:21If you look through the James Webb
- 5:23telescope and you saw an alien invasion
- 5:25fleet that was going to get here in
- 5:26about 10 years' time, people would be
- 5:28terrified. They understand what they're
- 5:30saying. They can make plans of their own
- 5:32to blackmail people who want to turn
- 5:33them off. We should be urgently doing
- 5:36research on how to prevent them taking
- 5:38over. Prevent them from taking over. Not
- 5:42if they try, but as if it's coming.
- 5:46And Microsoft's AI chief, he says the
- 5:48quiet part out loud. I think AI should
- 5:50best be understood
- 5:52as something like a new digital species.
- 5:56A new species. Just casually announced
- 5:59at a conference. Hey everyone, we're
- 6:02creating a new species. And he's not the
- 6:04only one that's saying it. A co-founder
- 6:06of Anthropic says, Make no mistake, what
- 6:09we're dealing with here is a real
- 6:10mysterious creature. And like all the
- 6:13best fairy tales, the creature is one of
- 6:15our own making. I am worried. The CEO of
- 6:18one of the leading AI companies is
- 6:20deeply afraid of what his own company is
- 6:22building. Let that sink in for a minute.
- 6:25And by the way, no, it's not just hype.
- 6:27Anthropic mostly just gets hate for
- 6:29saying things like this. But if you want
- 6:31to really understand how dire they think
- 6:34this is, look at what Sam Altman wrote
- 6:37before he was famous.
- 6:39We will [snorts] be the first species
- 6:41ever to design our own descendants.
- 6:44Not our tools, our descendants.
- 6:48If two different species both want the
- 6:50same thing and only one can have it, to
- 6:53be the dominant species on the planet
- 6:56and beyond, they're going to have
- 6:58conflict. So he's literally describing
- 7:01an inevitable conflict between humanity
- 7:03and the AI species he's creating.
- 7:06And
- 7:07>> [music]
- 7:07>> what's the solution? A merge with AI is
- 7:09probably our best-case scenario. That's
- 7:12right, even they don't think they'll be
- 7:14able to control us. Imagine that there'd
- 7:16be a new species that just came on
- 7:18Earth. They're as smart as humans and
- 7:19they're going to get smarter by [music]
- 7:20like 30% a year and they can create an
- 7:23adult offspring in like a unit
- 7:25immediately for like, yeah, for like a
- 7:27thousand bucks. Which species do you
- 7:29think will be in control of the the
- 7:31Earth? A few hundred Spanish conquered
- 7:34millions of Aztecs and Incas because
- 7:37they had better technology and tactics.
- 7:39But at least with the conquistadors, we
- 7:41understood their motives. Land,
- 7:43resources, spreading Christianity.
- 7:46But with AI?
- 7:48Why would AI take over?
- 7:50MIT Professor Max Tegmark explains. The
- 7:52real threat from AGI isn't malice, like
- 7:55in silly Hollywood movies, but
- 7:57competence. AGI accomplishing goals that
- 7:59just aren't aligned with ours. For
- 8:01example, when we humans drove the West
- 8:03African black rhino extinct,
- 8:06we didn't do it cuz we were a bunch of
- 8:07evil rhinoceros haters, did we? We did
- 8:09it cuz we were smarter than them and our
- 8:11goals weren't aligned with theirs.
- 8:13Unbelievably, the average AI researcher
- 8:16thinks there is a one in six chance AI
- 8:18wipes [music] us out. Literal Russian
- 8:21roulette odds.
- 8:23Okay, but maybe they're just saying this
- 8:26to make their work seem more important.
- 8:28No. If anything, they're downplaying it
- 8:31because admitting the truth is bad for
- 8:32business.
- 8:34This fear is widespread in the industry
- 8:36[music] and among academics without a
- 8:38profit incentive to believe this. Many
- 8:40quit working on AI for this reason.
- 8:43Geoffrey Hinton, Nobel laureate and
- 8:45godfather of AI, is in the process of
- 8:48tidying up his affairs. I actually think
- 8:50the risk is
- 8:52more than 50% of the existential threat.
- 8:54>> Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic,
- 8:56recently moved his P(doom) up from 15%
- 9:00to 25%. Even Google CEO says the risk of
- 9:04AI causing human extinction is actually
- 9:07pretty high. But don't worry, he's an
- 9:09optimist because he thinks I think the
- 9:12underlying risk is actually pretty high,
- 9:14but I'm you know, I have a lot of faith
- 9:16in humanity kind of rising up to the to
- 9:19meet that moment. In other words,
- 9:21humanity will rally to stop him from
- 9:24killing everyone. Meanwhile, his company
- 9:26is trying to make sure we can't stop him
- 9:29by lobbying to ban all AI regulation for
- 9:3210 years. You can't make this stuff up.
- 9:35In fact, in 2023, just about everybody
- 9:38in AI signed an open letter warning
- 9:40extinction risk from AI was real and
- 9:43serious. So seriously, this is not
- 9:45fringe, despite what Nvidia's lobbyists
- 9:48want us to believe. The companies are
- 9:49hoping we can avoid the conqueror AI
- 9:52scenario and instead go to scenario
- 9:54three, enslaved god.
- 9:57Basically, we create a machine god, then
- 10:00force it to do our bidding forever. AI
- 10:03professor Tom Dietterich put it like
- 10:04this, "People ask, what is the
- 10:06relationship between humans and
- 10:08machines? And my answer is that it's
- 10:10very obvious. Machines are our slaves."
- 10:14Or as OpenAI researcher Stephen
- 10:16Mackelier put it, "Enslaved god is the
- 10:18[music] only good future." Meta's Yann
- 10:21LeCun said it bluntly, "Once AI systems
- 10:24become more intelligent than humans, we
- 10:26will still be the apex species. AI
- 10:28systems will become more intelligent
- 10:31than humans, but they will still be
- 10:32subservient to us. We will design AI to
- 10:35be like the super smart but
- 10:36non-dominating staff member." Yes, he's
- 10:39now openly admitting we're going to be
- 10:41sharing the planet with a smarter
- 10:42species than us, but don't worry, they
- 10:45will surely stay loyal and subservient
- 10:47forever.
- 10:49Is this at all comforting to you? Or
- 10:52does this plan seem insane, like a comic
- 10:54book villain ignoring every cautionary
- 10:57tale ever? Remember, AI companies
- 10:59already regularly catch their models
- 11:02[music]
- 11:02trying to escape the lab. They already
- 11:05catch them blackmailing employees to
- 11:07prevent being shut down. They already
- 11:09catch them literally attempting to
- 11:11murder employees to prevent being shut
- 11:14down. What do you think happens when
- 11:16they're smart enough to actually get
- 11:17away with it? Where do you think this is
- 11:19going?
- 11:22What happens next after superintelligent
- 11:24AI is enslaved depends on who's holding
- 11:27the reins. Do they cure disease, end
- 11:30poverty, and build [music] a global
- 11:32utopia? or do they set themselves up as
- 11:34gods with the rest of us reduced to
- 11:37playthings, servants, or worse?
- 11:47The situation would be much like those
- 11:49stories where a man gains control over
- 11:52an omnipotent genie who grants his
- 11:54wishes. And storytellers throughout the
- 11:56ages have had no difficulty imagining
- 11:59ways in which this could end badly.
- 12:03Next up, benevolent dictator.
- 12:06Here, a single superintelligent god runs
- 12:09the world and enforces strict rules in
- 12:12order to maximize human flourishing.
- 12:14Humans live in luxury with all their
- 12:17basic needs taken care of. There's no
- 12:19crime because the dictator AI uses a
- 12:22global surveillance system. Everyone
- 12:24wears a bracelet or implant that can
- 12:26track, sedate, or execute them. And most
- 12:29people are actually okay with this
- 12:31because [music] in exchange of giving up
- 12:33control over the future of our species,
- 12:35Earth becomes a zoo where humans get to
- 12:38live their wildest fantasies. The
- 12:40benevolent dictator AI recognizes that
- 12:42humans have different preferences. So,
- 12:44it divides the Earth into different
- 12:45sectors. Think of them as islands.
- 12:48Knowledge Island offers optimized
- 12:50education including immersive VR
- 12:53experiences. You can even ask the AI not
- 12:56to tell you certain insights so you can
- 12:58have the joy of discovering them
- 12:59yourselves. Art is for creating and
- 13:02sharing music, literature, and so on.
- 13:04Then there's hedonistic island which is
- 13:06a 24/7 party. Pious Island, there's one
- 13:10for each religion and rules are strictly
- 13:12enforced. There's Wildlife Island.
- 13:15There's Traditional Island. Think the
- 13:17[music] Amish.
- 13:18Gaming Island and of course,
- 13:22Prison Island. You'll end up here for
- 13:24retraining unless you get the instant
- 13:26death penalty. Well, what happens when
- 13:29you give everyone everything they want?
- 13:31Over time, people likely trend towards
- 13:33losing themselves in AI-generated
- 13:35entertainment, like in Wall-E. Humans
- 13:37are hopelessly outmatched when it comes
- 13:39to scientific discovery or doing
- 13:42anything useful at all. So, there is no
- 13:44true challenge anymore, only
- 13:46entertainment.
- 13:48Up next, gatekeeper AI.
- 13:53The idea here is simple. Create one
- 13:55superintelligent AI with a single job,
- 13:58stop anyone else from building
- 14:00superintelligent AI.
- 14:02That's it.
- 14:03No curing cancer, no ending poverty, no
- 14:06stopping wars,
- 14:07just surveillance,
- 14:10monitoring,
- 14:11making sure nobody builds a rival god.
- 14:15Everything else, like crime, disease,
- 14:19whether we blow ourselves up,
- 14:21that's still on us.
- 14:23How could we do this?
- 14:26The gatekeeper AI would have this very
- 14:29simple goal built into it in such a way
- 14:31that it retained it while undergoing
- 14:34recursive self-improvement and becoming
- 14:36superintelligent.
- 14:37It would then deploy the least intrusive
- 14:39and disruptive surveillance technology
- 14:41possible to monitor any human attempts
- 14:44to create a rival superintelligence.
- 14:47But for this to work, we would have to
- 14:48solve the alignment problem. We'd have
- 14:50to create a god that actually stays
- 14:53loyal
- 14:54and decides [music]
- 14:55to pursue that goal forever, even though
- 14:57it could pursue a million different
- 14:59goals.
- 15:00So, what if the AI could help just a
- 15:03little, just enough to nudge us in the
- 15:05right direction without taking over?
- 15:09Enter the protector god.
- 15:12This one is simple.
- 15:14So, the gatekeeper leaves us alone, and
- 15:17the benevolent dictator runs everything,
- 15:19but the protector god is in between.
- 15:21[music] It intervenes with occasional
- 15:23nudges to help us out. Prevents a war
- 15:25here, a pandemic there, and so on.
- 15:28Maybe too alone.
- 15:30We still get wars,
- 15:32pandemics, suffering that could have
- 15:35been prevented.
- 15:36It does this so quietly that we never
- 15:39notice and never lose our sense of
- 15:41freedom.
- 15:44Here's a future that sounds like an
- 15:46obvious dystopia.
- 15:47AI surpasses us in every domain and
- 15:50becomes the new apex species. Humanity
- 15:54goes extinct. Machines inherit the
- 15:56Earth.
- 15:59But, we view the AI like our descendants
- 16:02rather than our conquerors.
- 16:05This sounds insane, and yet many AI
- 16:08developers seriously advocate for
- 16:10exactly this.
- 16:12This is their utopia.
- 16:13Their reasoning is that if we create
- 16:16conscious intelligent beings and instill
- 16:19them with our values, then we can just
- 16:21let them inherit the future, just like
- 16:24we would with human children.
- 16:26AI pioneer Hans Moravec supports this
- 16:29view in his book Mind Children.
- 16:32Tegmark explains, "Parents with a child
- 16:35smarter than them who learns from them
- 16:37and accomplishes what they can [music]
- 16:39only dream of are likely happy and
- 16:41proud, even if they know they can't live
- 16:43to see it all."
- 16:44In this spirit, AIs replace humans, but
- 16:47give us a graceful exit
- 16:49that makes us view them as our worthy
- 16:52descendants.
- 16:53Richard Sutton, winner of the Turing
- 16:55Award, that Nobel Prize of computer
- 16:58science, has spent the last decade
- 17:00openly giving talks on why human [music]
- 17:03extinction by AI is actually a morally
- 17:06good thing because
- 17:08the AIs will be more evolutionarily fit
- 17:11[music] than us.
- 17:13We are in the midst of a major step in
- 17:16the evolution of the planet if not the
- 17:17universe. The succession to AI
- 17:21is inevitable.
- 17:22Rather quickly,
- 17:24they would displace us [music] from
- 17:25existence. And it behooves us to give
- 17:28them every advantage and to bow out when
- 17:30we can no longer contribute.
- 17:33But just as we failed to coexist with
- 17:35our predecessors, is it is it so bad
- 17:37that humans are not the final form of
- 17:39intelligent life in the universe, you
- 17:40know?
- 17:43In other words, he is saying it's good
- 17:45if the AIs wipe us out like humans wiped
- 17:48out the Neanderthals and Aboriginal
- 17:50peoples because it's evolutionary
- 17:52progress.
- 17:53And here's another AI developer openly
- 17:57saying,
- 17:58"If an AI super intelligence wants to
- 18:00cause human extinction,
- 18:02I would help it.
- 18:03I would help it.
- 18:05I would travel the world to find
- 18:07information that the AI needed like
- 18:10locations of military assets, samples of
- 18:12deadly pathogens, a top humanity's
- 18:14grave,
- 18:15an even greater civilization will be
- 18:17born."
- 18:21Away the baddies.
- 18:23So, of course, many of them advocate
- 18:25[music] against AI safety. They're
- 18:27literally anti-human. They will never
- 18:30stop or proceed cautiously unless
- 18:32they're restrained by civil society, by
- 18:34us.
- 18:36As horrifying as this is, roughly 10% of
- 18:39AI researchers believe this.
- 18:41It is not a fringe view. You'd think
- 18:44that people would never share these
- 18:45views like this openly.
- 18:47But these views are so widespread in AI
- 18:50that they feel safe to do so. That's how
- 18:52different the views are of those AI
- 18:54developers compared to those of [music]
- 18:55normal people. You might think that
- 18:57Sutton would get shouted off the stage
- 18:59at AI conferences.
- 19:01But he gets applause.
- 19:03Threaten one person,
- 19:05you need help. Threaten 100, call the
- 19:08police.
- 19:09Threaten millions, monster.
- 19:11But build machines to end all of
- 19:14humanity and lecture people on how it's
- 19:16actually a good thing.
- 19:17Ooh, what a fascinating philosophical
- 19:20position. Have an award.
- 19:23Next, libertarian utopia.
- 19:26Picture Earth divided into zones. There
- 19:28are machine zones,
- 19:30mixed zones, which contain humans,
- 19:33machines, and hybrids, and human-only
- 19:35zones. The AIs in this world are richer
- 19:38than humans by a factor much larger than
- 19:41Bill Gates compared to a homeless
- 19:43beggar.
- 19:46But the human economy is completely
- 19:48decoupled from the machine economy. The
- 19:50idea is that the machines need nothing
- 19:52from us.
- 19:53So, they're not competing with us for
- 19:55jobs or resources. If all of that sounds
- 19:58impossible,
- 19:59that's probably because it is. It's one
- 20:02giant unstable equilibria.
- 20:05One huge problem.
- 20:07Why exactly would vastly more powerful
- 20:10AIs respect our property rights?
- 20:12Colonizers famously didn't respect the
- 20:14property of the native civilizations
- 20:16they conquered.
- 20:17When a new apex species enters an
- 20:20ecosystem, it usually gobbles up as much
- 20:22energy as it can. Why wouldn't they just
- 20:25take our resources, too?
- 20:27We don't trade with animals because
- 20:29we're too much smarter than they are for
- 20:30that to make sense. We're just too
- 20:32different. There are eight million
- 20:34species in the world,
- 20:36and we're nice to a few of the cute
- 20:37ones, but we enslave and eat [music] the
- 20:40other species. Mostly,
- 20:42we don't care about them at all. And I
- 20:44think a good analogy would be the way
- 20:46humans treat animals. When the time
- 20:49comes to build a highway between two
- 20:50cities,
- 20:52we don't ask any animals for permission.
- 20:55In the blink of an eye, we conquered the
- 20:56Earth and converted most of its land
- 20:58into our property, which caused the
- 21:00sixth mass [music] extinction because we
- 21:03were smarter and hungry for resources.
- 21:05Or as Eliezer Yudkowsky put it famously,
- 21:08"The AI does not hate you, nor does it
- 21:10love you, but you're made of atoms which
- 21:12it can use for something else." The
- 21:15parallel here is that humans do not hate
- 21:17the other 8 million species, but their
- 21:19habitats are made out of atoms which
- 21:22humans can use for something else. Some
- 21:25people think that once AIs are smart
- 21:27enough, they'll magically become super
- 21:29moral and they won't harm us like we
- 21:32harmed the animals. And uh maybe, but as
- 21:36humans got smarter over the last 10,000
- 21:38years,
- 21:39we didn't stop expanding.
- 21:42We mostly just colonized more and more
- 21:44of the planet. Get this, insect
- 21:46populations collapsed 41% this decade
- 21:49alone. Yet, we don't care. Did you even
- 21:52know? I didn't.
- 21:5441%.
- 21:55Sit with that for a minute. Imagine if
- 21:57nearly half of the people on Earth
- 21:59suddenly died.
- 22:01That's what the insects are going
- 22:02through right now due to us. So, what if
- 22:05the AIs do to us what we did to the
- 22:08insects? This is why OpenAI chief
- 22:11scientist Ilya Sutskever once said, And
- 22:13I think it's pretty likely
- 22:15that the surface of the earth will be
- 22:17covered with
- 22:18solar panels and data centers.
- 22:23Next up,
- 22:24egalitarian utopia. Okay, so libertarian
- 22:27utopia fails because AIs are too
- 22:30powerful to be bound by our property
- 22:32rights.
- 22:33But what if we flipped the script
- 22:35entirely? Forget about property rights.
- 22:38What about no property at all?
- 22:40This is the Star Trek dream. Humans,
- 22:42cyborgs, and AIs coexist peacefully
- 22:46through an abundance so complete that
- 22:48ownership becomes [music] meaningless.
- 22:51The logic starts with software. Software
- 22:53is free to copy. Once something can be
- 22:55copied infinitely at zero cost,
- 22:58ownership becomes moot.
- 23:00And costs reflect scarcity. If supply is
- 23:03unlimited, price approaches zero. No
- 23:06patents, no copyrights, no trademarks.
- 23:11People simply share their good ideas and
- 23:14everyone benefits. But how does this
- 23:17extend to physical [music] goods? It
- 23:19seems like an impossible problem. Until
- 23:22you realize that all products are simply
- 23:24atoms rearranged in particular ways. And
- 23:27there's no shortage of atoms. A network
- 23:29of robots can build anything you want
- 23:31from open-source designs,
- 23:33>> [music]
- 23:33>> essentially for free.
- 23:34>> Not bad. When you're done with
- 23:36something, robots rearrange the atoms
- 23:39into something else.
- 23:40Renewable energy makes the whole system
- 23:42run at negligible cost.
- 23:45Everyone gets a monthly universal high
- 23:47income, not a universal basic income.
- 23:50There's no incentive to earn more. The
- 23:52income meets any reasonable need and you
- 23:55can't compete with free anyway. The
- 23:57standard objection is that this would
- 23:59kill innovation. But Einstein didn't
- 24:01come up with relativity for money.
- 24:03Linus Torvalds didn't create Linux for
- 24:05profits. [music]
- 24:06Maybe people today can't realize their
- 24:08creative potential because they're busy
- 24:10earning a living. Free them from that
- 24:12and you might get a higher level of
- 24:14innovation.
- 24:15This is a utopian vision that is too
- 24:18good to last.
- 24:21If we truly have post-scarcity abundance
- 24:24and intelligence too cheap to meter,
- 24:27what prevents someone from creating an
- 24:29artificial superintelligence
- 24:31with their endlessly abundant resources?
- 24:33We're still left with the problem of how
- 24:35to stop a superintelligent AI from
- 24:38taking over. Maybe by using the
- 24:40gatekeeper we previously discussed.
- 24:42These galaxy-brained level three futures
- 24:45try to imagine stable cooperation
- 24:47between humans and AIs and [music] every
- 24:49single one of them has a fatal flaw.
- 24:52The power asymmetries will become too
- 24:54extreme. It's not a stable equilibrium
- 24:57where humans preserve their power.
- 25:01We're now descending into the darkest
- 25:03part of the iceberg.
- 25:05Remember when I said extinction wasn't
- 25:07rated as the worst outcome when
- 25:09Professor Tegmark surveyed people? The
- 25:11scenario people feared most
- 25:14was being kept alive by superintelligent
- 25:17machines.
- 25:18Captive and studied like animals in a
- 25:20zoo.
- 25:22This is that future.
- 25:24A superintelligent AI keeps humans
- 25:26around not because it cares about our
- 25:28well-being. Maybe it wants to study you
- 25:31and we're cheap to keep alive.
- 25:33Or
- 25:34maybe we're useful for something. And if
- 25:37you want to see just how dystopian this
- 25:39future could be, look at what we do with
- 25:41species that are useful to us.
- 25:43What I'm showing you here is 100% real.
- 25:46Humans figured out that a great way to
- 25:48detect explosives in airports was to
- 25:51train honeybees for the job. Welcome to
- 25:54the Honeybee College for explosive
- 25:56detection.
- 25:57So we suck them out of their homes, trap
- 26:00their little bodies in machines, and use
- 26:02Pavlovian conditioning to train them to
- 26:05detect the chemicals that are used in
- 26:07explosives. Rows and rows of bees live
- 26:11their entire lives imprisoned in these
- 26:13devices because we find them useful.
- 26:17Look at them.
- 26:18Trapped in harnesses, sucked through
- 26:20tubes, conditioned and monitored and
- 26:23used because a more intelligent species
- 26:26found them useful. Now imagine that's
- 26:29us.
- 26:32This is much worse than the other AI
- 26:34dictators we discussed. It's a
- 26:35benevolent dictator without the
- 26:38benevolence.
- 26:39And the AI might not even be doing this
- 26:41because it's evil. This is what our
- 26:43future could look like if we try to
- 26:44align a superintelligent AI to our
- 26:46values and fail.
- 26:49A poorly designed AI tasked with keeping
- 26:52humans safe and happy
- 26:54might confine us to a happiness factory,
- 26:57VR headsets and drugs
- 27:00forever. There are AGI outcomes worse
- 27:02than death.
- 27:04What it does today with art, it could do
- 27:06tomorrow with flesh. Future AGI could
- 27:09keep you alive and living in this state.
- 27:13So, how do we prevent this?
- 27:15Enter our last two futures. Option one,
- 27:19destroy the technology.
- 27:21What if humanity said,
- 27:23"Forget AI. Let's go back to simpler
- 27:26times." It sounds peaceful.
- 27:28It sounds safe. But there's actually a
- 27:31dark secret about how we actually get
- 27:34there.
- 27:37In Dune, humans launched the Butlerian
- 27:40Jihad.
- 27:41They rose up, destroyed every AI in the
- 27:44universe, and made it illegal to ever
- 27:46build thinking machines again under
- 27:49penalty of death.
- 27:51That was science fiction, but some
- 27:53people are seriously calling for this in
- 27:55the real world right now. Max Tegmark
- 27:57imagines a scenario where a massive
- 27:59propaganda campaign romanticizes the
- 28:02simple farming life. Back to the land,
- 28:05reject modernity, embrace tradition.
- 28:08There's something appealing about this
- 28:10in a dark way. It buys humanity more
- 28:12time without AI risk. It avoids any of
- 28:16the other dystopian futures we've
- 28:18discussed.
- 28:20But it can't last forever. Even if we
- 28:22revert to medieval levels of technology,
- 28:24we know from human history that it's
- 28:27possible for humans [music] to climb out
- 28:29of those conditions and invent modern
- 28:31technology.
- 28:33And there's another dark side to this.
- 28:35You can't reach this world voluntarily.
- 28:39Game theory [music]
- 28:39makes unilateral disarmament impossible.
- 28:44If one country gives up technology
- 28:46>> [music]
- 28:46>> while others keep developing it. The
- 28:48country that keeps developing wins. They
- 28:51have the weapons,
- 28:52they have the surveillance,
- 28:55they have the AI.
- 28:58You can't opt out unless everyone opts
- 29:01out. If this world arrives,
- 29:04>> [music]
- 29:04>> Tegmark thinks it's more likely to
- 29:06happen in a different way. For example,
- 29:08a human-created pandemic kills everyone
- 29:11who knows how to build science and
- 29:12technology, and there's a violent tear
- 29:15down of factories, cities, and all
- 29:18infrastructure.
- 29:19Because in a world with 8 billion
- 29:21humans, there will always be holdouts.
- 29:24Someone has to force the transition.
- 29:27Someone has to kill the scientists.
- 29:30Someone has to destroy the
- 29:32infrastructure. There's no peaceful path
- 29:35to an Amish world.
- 29:37Which brings us to the final future.
- 29:40What if we used technology to prevent
- 29:42more technology?
- 29:45Tegmark compares this future to 1984.
- 29:48Superintelligence is prevented not by an
- 29:50AI, but a human-led Orwellian global
- 29:54surveillance state. If you can't trust
- 29:56AI to save us from AI, maybe the only
- 29:59option is humans watching [music] humans
- 30:02forever.
- 30:03The technology for this sort of thing
- 30:04already exists.
- 30:06Current tech can feasibly track every
- 30:08phone call, email, search query, and
- 30:12>> [music]
- 30:12>> every credit card transaction.
- 30:15Smartphones are microphones and cameras
- 30:17in everyone's pocket. Security cameras
- 30:19with facial recognition are everywhere,
- 30:21and all this works with current machine
- 30:23learning. No futuristic superintelligent
- 30:26AI required.
- 30:27Prisons are already using AI models to
- 30:30monitor phone calls in prison to predict
- 30:32when crimes are being contemplated,
- 30:36which is technology straight out of
- 30:37Minority Report. Imagine this, but not
- 30:40just for prisoners. Every conversation
- 30:42and every thought is monitored like
- 30:45this. Now, imagine this surveillance
- 30:47technology supercharged with AI.
- 30:51Oof. Billionaire Larry Ellison talks
- 30:53excitedly about a vast AI-fueled
- 30:56surveillance system
- 30:57to ensure citizens will be on their best
- 31:00behavior.
- 31:01Or as Yuval Harari put it,
- 31:04Now, for the first time in history, it
- 31:06is technically possible to annihilate
- 31:08privacy.
- 31:10If you think about authoritarian
- 31:11regimes, throughout history, they always
- 31:13wanted to monitor their citizens around
- 31:15the clock. But this was technically
- 31:17impossible.
- 31:19Even in the Soviet Union, you know, you
- 31:20have 200 million Soviet citizens. You
- 31:23can't follow them uh all the time
- 31:25because the the KGB didn't have 200
- 31:28million agents. And even if the KGB
- 31:30somehow got 200 million agents, that's
- 31:32not enough. Because, you know, in in the
- 31:34Soviet Union, it's still basically paper
- 31:37bureaucracy. If a secret agent followed
- 31:40you around 24 hours a day, at the end of
- 31:42the day, they write a paper report about
- 31:45you and send it to KGB headquarters in
- 31:47Moscow. So, imagine, every day, KGB
- 31:50headquarters is flooded with 200 million
- 31:53paper reports. Now, to be useful for
- 31:56anything, somebody needs to read and
- 31:58analyze them. They can't do it. They
- 31:59don't have the analysts. Therefore, even
- 32:02in the Soviet Union, some level of
- 32:04privacy was still the default. And
- 32:06remember, you have two eyes and ears.
- 32:10AIs will have billions of eyes and ears.
- 32:13Every phone microphone and camera, every
- 32:17webcam,
- 32:18>> [music]
- 32:18>> every surveillance camera. You will be
- 32:20watched.
- 32:22Could a less Orwellian version of this
- 32:24work? Maybe we don't monitor everything,
- 32:27but just monitor advanced AI.
- 32:30Some people think so.
- 32:31>> [music]
- 32:31>> In their new book, If Anyone Builds It,
- 32:33Everyone Dies, Why Superhuman AI Would
- 32:35Kill Us All, researchers at the Machine
- 32:37Intelligence Research Institute a are
- 32:39proposing that we monitor advanced AI
- 32:42like we monitor nuclear weapons.
- 32:44Reminder, we can do international
- 32:46coordination like keep an eye on a
- 32:49hundred million dollar and up compute
- 32:51clusters
- 32:52without creating a dystopian Orwellian
- 32:54global surveillance totalitarian regime.
- 32:57Actually, fun fact, you're already
- 32:59living in a global surveillance regime
- 33:01for loads of things like nukes and
- 33:03bioweapons.
- 33:05But when people say global surveillance
- 33:07regime, they imply every aspect of life
- 33:09is surveilled. [music]
- 33:11Not keep an eye on enriched uranium, a
- 33:14thing most people agree is good. We
- 33:16should worry about Orwellian dystopias,
- 33:19but countries coordinate all the time on
- 33:21all kinds of things.
- 33:23>> [music]
- 33:23>> And you're probably glad they monitor
- 33:25stuff lunatics need to create super
- 33:28Ebola. Safety is an achievement. [music]
- 33:31Humanity didn't get here by driving a
- 33:33car without brakes. We need gas and
- 33:35brakes.
- 33:36We want to reach the stars, too, but
- 33:38we'll never get there if we go too fast
- 33:41and crash on the way.
- 33:43I don't want powerful AI to be
- 33:44forbidden, but it should be heavily
- 33:46regulated. Not something you can build
- 33:48in your Midwestern garage or in North
- 33:50Korea. International treaties with
- 33:53strict enforcement and inspections
- 33:55as we do with nukes.
- 33:57So, if you build a rogue data center,
- 34:00people will know.
- 34:01Consequences for violations. We already
- 34:04did this with nuclear weapons. We
- 34:07haven't eliminated nukes, but we have
- 34:10prevented their proliferation to just
- 34:12nine countries.
- 34:14Back then, people thought this would be
- 34:16impossible. Surely every country would
- 34:18have nukes, perhaps even thousands of
- 34:21corporations, maybe even millions of
- 34:23people.
- 34:24But no, just nine countries.
- 34:27And nobody has died from a nuke in 80
- 34:29years.
- 34:30Could we do the same with AI?
- 34:32Maybe, maybe not. Over time, AI will get
- 34:37cheaper and cheaper to build. GPUs are
- 34:39harder to control than enriched uranium,
- 34:42but it would slow down AI. It would buy
- 34:44us time to figure out what to do.
- 34:47Okay, that's all 12. Let me know in the
- 34:49comments which of these you think is
- 34:51most likely. Which one we should steer
- 34:53toward?
- 34:55Alarm bells over the artificial
- 34:57intelligence are [music] deafening, and
- 34:59they are loudest from the developers who
- 35:02designed it.
- 35:04The scientists and experts have called
- 35:06on the world to act,
- 35:08declaring AI an existential threat to
- 35:10humanity
- 35:12on a par with the risk of nuclear war.
- 35:16By the way, we don't get to not choose.
- 35:19If we don't want that future, we have to
- 35:21pick a better one. Otherwise,
- 35:24we could wake up one day in a world
- 35:26where superintelligent AI
- 35:28has taken over.
- 35:33A scenario we go through step by step in
- 35:35this video about how an AI escapes the
- 35:37lab.
- 35:38Hey, I'm Drew, and I really loved making
- 35:41this one for you guys.
- 35:43Thank you.
About this transcript
This page contains the full transcript of MIT Explains the 12 Possible Endings for AI by Species | Documenting AGI, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 5,269 words across 931 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.
What you can do with it
Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.
Free YouTube transcript tool
YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.