[Review] Yuval Noah Harari's "Nexus": Why Humans Must Maintain Control Over AI

 

1. Can Humans Overcome AI-Driven Challenges as We Have in the Past?

Yuval Noah Harari expresses uncertainty about whether humanity can overcome the problems caused by AI as we have done with past crises. He argues that it is irrational to assume we will survive next-generation challenges simply because we have survived previous ones. I share this view. The issues AI introduces are fundamentally different in nature and appear significantly more difficult to resolve. If AI creates a crisis, the sheer technical complexity may make it impossible to fix. This reinforces my belief that humans must retain ultimate sovereignty over AI.

2. Differences in AI Management Capabilities by Political System

The book suggests that a society’s ability to manage AI-related issues depends on its political system. Authoritarian regimes use AI to maintain power, but the moment they become dependent on its capabilities, they risk losing control to the AI itself. Conversely, in democracies, where AI development and usage are led by the private sector, pluralistic control centers make it easier to address and resolve problems when AI causes trouble.

3. The Danger of AI and Its Explosive Growth Rate

After being recognized as an AI expert following the publication of Homo Deus, Harari noted a shift in the atmosphere of policy discussions. While initial meetings were relatively relaxed, recent ones have become increasingly urgent. Having personally scrapped AI-related news for about a year, I find the pace of development truly shocking. This rapid evolution raises doubts about whether humans can still exert control and suggests we may reach a point where we no longer understand how or why AI is advancing.

4. Why Humans Must Take the Lead in the AI Era

Admittedly, finding solutions for a technology as novel as AI is daunting, especially since its technical evolution is often difficult to verify. However, this is precisely why developers must strive to understand its underlying principles and guide its evolution to be compatible with human social and cultural logic. Only then can we ensure that AI remains a safe and beneficial tool for humanity.


Disclaimer: This post is a personal book review of "Nexus" by Yuval Noah Harari and is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal or professional advice. The author assumes no responsibility for any actions taken based on the content of this review. Please consult with a legal professional for specific guidance on AI regulations or compliance.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The AI Personhood Conundrum: Analyzing Liabilities, Rights, and the Impossibility of 'Electronic Personhood'

  I. The History and Definition of Legal Personhood 1. Historical Analogies and AI Application The most common historical analogy for non-human personhood is the Corporation . Corporations are allowed to assume separate legal liabilities independent of their founders or owners. Maritime law also sometimes assigns liability in rem (against the thing itself) to Ships . 2. Priority of Legal Personhood When applying legal personhood to AI, most legal scholars argue that Liabilities/Obligations must be granted priority over Rights . This priority stems from the need to prioritize victim compensation and risk allocation in cases of AI-induced harm. Furthermore, granting rights seems premature, as the logical process leading to AI conclusions lacks proven stability, and even entities like pets, dogs, and cats, which are closer to humans, have not been granted legal personhood. II. Autonomy, Ownership, and Property Rights 1. Ownership of AI Creations In the United St...
Read more

The AI Data Paradox: Fulfilling the Legal Mandate of Data Minimization in Complex AI Systems (GDPR & CCPA)

  I. The Legal Foundation and Risks of Data Minimization (DM) 1. Legal Definition and Sources Data Minimization (DM) is the principle that personal data processing must be "adequate, relevant, and limited to what is necessary" in relation to the specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes for which they are processed (e.g., GDPR Article 5(1)(c) ). This principle is a core requirement in major data protection laws, including GDPR (EU) and CCPA (California/US) . 2. Risks of Non-Compliance GDPR: Violating DM can lead to severe fines, reaching up to 4% of a company's global annual turnover. CCPA: DM violations can be used as a basis for Class Action lawsuits , as the law grants a Private Right of Action to consumers. II. The Paradox: AI's Data Thirst vs. Legal Restriction The fundamental challenge posed by the DM principle to AI development is a direct conflict between legal compliance and model performance. 1. The Conflict ...
Read more

The Opportunity Cost: How Regulatory Divide Shapes AI Talent Flow and South Korea's Sovereign Ambition

  I. Introduction: Redefining Value in the AI Economy Having analyzed the legal pitfalls (Article #1) and societal risks (Article #2) of Generative AI, we turn to the economic opportunity . The AI revolution is not simply a risk to be mitigated; it is a global engine for wealth creation. Understanding the new labor market dynamics and the geopolitical forces shaping AI capital flow is crucial for nations seeking to lead the next technological decade. II. Section 1: The New Labor Market Paradigm: Competition vs. Elimination The immediate impact of Generative AI has been felt across white-collar sectors traditionally protected by specialized knowledge: Disruption of Routine Specialization: AI is demonstrably capable of replacing routine tasks in fields like translation, basic design, and entry-level accounting/bookkeeping . A Nuanced View on Job Loss: The narrative of mass job elimination is overly simplistic. AI has, in fact, lowered the barr...
Read more