My Perspective on the Human World in the Era of Super-Intelligent AI and Machines That Do More Than Just Follow Commands

In the “human world,” how do we define this planet? First, we must assume that the world remains a world where humans are still the dominant species, exercising true management and control. This authority still commands and directs all forms of AI and machinery, even though we have allowed these technologies to make many decisions on our behalf. Beyond that, there are surely many things we do not understand, yet we accept them, both willingly and out of ignorance.

Now let’s see what role humans have left. I will try to strip away all the fine details, leaving only the core ideas.

Role One: “The Consumer”

Why would humans drive the human world forward? They do so for the benefit of humans, and the one thing that is continuous and eternally true is that humans are consumers—users of resources, or, if you prefer, destroyers of resources. This is what drives the economic system and all the cycles associated with the “human world.”

The Second Role: “Liability”

You read that correctly. It is not “responsibility”; only “liability” remains. Because in the future, humans will not do much work. The true value we produce, on average, will not even reach 0.01% of the value that the smartest and most diligent machines will generate in the coming era. And since humans will not do much work but must continue to exist, we will be allocated resources to sustain life and maintain an appropriate level of happiness. In an era where machines do everything and energy is likely to be effectively unlimited thanks to new technologies created with AI’s help, the crucial mission that only humans can perform is to bear liability when problems arise. We will use machines extensively, but it is impossible for no one to be held liable. Machines or AI do not fear life imprisonment. We could lock an AI or machine away for 100 years, 200 years, 1,000 years, or even encase it in high-tech glass crystal and imprison it for a million years; it would not care. There is no problem for it. It feels no remorse and does not even improve itself. We could execute an AI by deleting it, or execute a robot by disassembling it into spare parts, but it would likely yield no benefit and would not help prevent the recurrence of the problem in any way. Therefore, humans must remain the ones who bear liability (and they will likely need to hold an appropriate level of power as well) in various mechanisms that require oversight for safety and in other matters vital to the survival of human society.

The Third Role: “Controlling the Rules and Designing the System”

If we still want a controllable human world that can continue to safeguard human interests, humans must not merely “hold the ultimate authority” to approve the creation and modification of systems. “Authority that lacks knowledge, moral and ethical principles (as defined by the species called humans), understanding, and sufficient access to detail cannot withstand rapid, powerful change.” No problem-solving or development is possible without “deep and true knowledge”; without it, we cannot genuinely control or design processes for survival. We must be the designers and improvers of the systems involved in managing resources and the rules of coexistence, both among humans themselves and between humans and machines. We must truly control the overall picture. If we let go of this matter—for instance, allowing machines to manage energy on their own, to manage resources in space instead of humans, to access weapons and win wars independently (due to their intelligence and computational power far exceeding ours), or to take over planning through various simulation models and then trust the data presented by machines almost entirely—human society will inevitably assume the highest level of risk, reaching a point of collapse or being viewed as a parasite draining the resources of planet Earth.

Therefore, in formulating strategy, preparing people, designing systems, operational planning, and long-term planning regarding the allocation of any human resources, a sharp dividing line should be drawn, with a far-sighted view of these three true, long-term roles of human beings. Branching out into more than these three points until it becomes cluttered intellectual noise may blur the picture more than is necessary.

I leave this point for those who happen to come across it and read.

Thank you.