Unlike those who think that humanity has boarded a bus that is heading straight to a cliff, Joan Clotet, author of ‘Digital Humanism’ (Headboard Books), believes that we must face the digital age with hope and without fear. to the horsemen of the apocalypse. “If we did not shift the technology-people equation towards people, we should receive the Nobel Prize for stupidity,” can already be read in the prologue of the first book published in Spain about a movement that places ethics at the forefront.
Digital humanism is for now an academic movement of German descent that could become a political doctrine. Not in vain, classical humanism flourished during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment thanks to the thinkers of that time using the printing press and books as tools to establish new connections and build communities. Now digital humanists have appeared, such as Joan Clotet, convinced that new digital technologies could bring us more advantages than disadvantages.
Although shortly after the Internet emerged, digital humanists appeared telling stories about goodness on the Internet and how the Internet could be used to bring out the best in human nature and oneself, in the last decade the virtual sky has been filled with lightning and thunder. : loss of privacy, abundant false information, rise of extremist behavior orchestrated from social networks, etc.
Are we at risk of turning ourselves into machines? Digital humanists think not. They even maintain that algorithms will help transform caterpillars into butterflies so that humans can fly higher, increase our capabilities and be much freer.
What is digital humanism?
It is based on defending that people are the main point of reference in all those decisions that may impact them when using digital technologies. A digital humanist has a conscious and proactive attitude about the need for technology to be at the service of people.
Isn’t “digital humanism” an oxymoron like “preventive war”, “dark light” or “eternal instant”?
Supossely Yes. But it is in our hands to make it less and less so. To do this, it will be necessary to compensate for the excessive digitalization that surrounds us with a responsible humanization of machines.
What is your advice for seeing positively issues that others see as threats?
When there is uncertainty and accelerated changes, it is normal to believe that we are putting important things at risk for people, which makes it more difficult for us to see the opportunities. It is not about being optimistic but simply about considering that there may be many good things in what we do not know. In my book I write that “the machine proposes and the human disposes.” A hospital may have great technology to achieve more accurate diagnoses, but in the end it is the doctor who must be held responsible.
What wonderful things will we see in the coming years?
We will be able to solve very serious problems related to climate change in record time. It will also be possible to eradicate very serious diseases that, thanks to artificial intelligence and computational capacity, we will be able to solve many years sooner than if these technologies did not exist. In general, digital technologies will help us better diagnose problems and solve them in less time. Artificial intelligence is already providing spectacular things, but it can also cause problems.
The Vienna Manifesto to promote digital humanism that more than a thousand technology experts from different countries signed in 2019 begins with a quote from British engineer Tim Berners-Lee: “The system is failing.” What is not working well?
When we hear phrases like this we usually think of technology first. But the system is a set of things, technologies and people. And the ones who are failing are the people. Responsible, respectful, ethical and safe technologies must be developed. People have a lot to improve when creating and developing technology, but for that it is necessary to have a critical sense.
Alphabet, Open AI, Microsoft, Meta, Apple and Amazon are delighted with the term “digital humanism”. How would you try to convince your users that whatever is good for these corporations will be good for humanity as a whole?
You have to be aware that the greatest interest of any company, whether large or small, is to make money. So those technology companies that really want to be respectful of their customers must demonstrate it with their products and their ethics. Digital consumers have much more strength than we imagine. For example, when deciding to support one company or another. In the same way that we go to the supermarket where we think it treats us better, we will stop going to those technology corporations that are not interested in their customers.
How can AI help us be better humans?
Delegating to it activities that can be automated in order to grow in everything that is only within our reach.
In his book he cites a report from the World Economic Forum that warns that by 2027, 43% of the tasks previously performed by humans will be done by machines. For digital humanists, should robots that replace jobs pay taxes and contribute to the maintenance of the public pension system?
In my opinion, yes. Anyone who contributes to the maintenance of the work system, be it a person or a robot, should do their bit for the common good.
Robot CEOs are beginning to gain ground. This is the case of Mika, the robot CEO of the Polish beverage company Dictador, but also of Tang Yu, the humanoid robot named CEO of the Chinese video game company NetDragon Websoft. However, as he points out in his book, robots should not solve problems between people or take disciplinary action. So, what is its main task? Always be active, working 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 365 days a year? Doing what?
Today, robot CEOs are something similar to what happens at a fashion show: they are somewhat quirky designs that are not usually seen on Mondays walking down the street, but that are beginning to set a trend. The appearance of CEO robots means that those responsible for a company will be able to have, if they consider it appropriate, a cognitive assistant that helps make the best decisions at all times. But a robot CEO can’t run a company by himself.
Does this mean that there must always be a hierarchical superior above the android CEO?
The mission of a robot is to advise the management team so that they can make the most rational and ethical decisions possible. That is, with the least biases. Currently, this is not yet possible, but one day it will be. This should lead human CEOs to not be simple executors, but to take care of their employees and their customers and inspire them. If it is simply executing orders, a robot can do it much better.
In 2018, an android named Michihito ran for mayor of a Tokyo district to promote the use of artificial intelligence in society and obtained 4,013 votes, placing third against the winner, Hiroyuki Abe, the human who won with 34,603. votes. However, more than four thousand people thought that Michihito could make better decisions than anyone… If we accept that machines are always at the service of people, would voting for Michihito be like supporting the company’s computer engineers? Japanese Kokoro who programmed the automaton?
No. I think that the votes that Michihito obtained are a symptom of the distrust that some human candidates generate and the gaps they have.
For example?
For example, by not demonstrating a real interest in people being able to progress, but only seeking their votes.
What would you say to those who claim that digitalization is a new type of colonialism?
That it could become so and that we have to have the necessary debates to prevent it from happening.
And how would you convince readers that artificial intelligence will bring a better world?
Inviting them to reflect on everything that technology does for them in their daily lives right now, and what would happen if it stopped doing so. I would invite anyone who fears that their workplace could be automated within a short time to develop aspects that technology will never be able to do, because they will be greatly needed. I’m talking about emotion, listening, creativity… The more digital the world is, the more human we should make it.
