Even if AI reaches the stage where it appears to be fully sentient and able to think fully for itself, the truth that everyone will sooner or later have to accept is that AI is only a programme or software code. AI will only function within the parameters that it was originally set – whether they are right, wrong or their function rests upon the question of whether they are genuinely complete.

For a machine or AI programme to fully understand the human condition, it would either have to be living the complete human experience itself, with the abilities and understanding that we all have, or would to have been comprehensively and exhaustively programmed by a programmer or programmers together, who possess this inexhaustible knowledge themselves.

AI will not become sentient in the way that humans and other ‘living’ creatures can be.

Even the ultimate act of self-preservation suggested as possible by the AI movie legend that is Skynet from the Terminator films, was functioning based upon the limitations of its programming when it launched an all-out nuclear attack upon the world.

The real problem that we face with any and all forms of AI and Artificial Intelligence for the future, is the governance and the ethical boundaries or restrictions that any of its forms is able to operate under – even if that operation is itself carried out under the misused term ‘self-learning’.

No AI programmer or group of AI programmers have anywhere near the universal understanding of the human experience that would enable them to create a program that alludes to it, let alone covers the universality in difference of the way that humans actually think.

The reason for this is that no human exists on this planet today, who has the understanding or even the ability to understand everyone else’s experiences and the processes which make them think or have made them think, throughout the history of time.

As such, the inherent problem with any AI programming is that if the programmer, programmers or anyone who makes a decision upon what that AI can or cannot do, then do so in a subjective, biased or prejudicial way at any level at all – which will include their own lack of knowledge and understanding of what each and every other human being on the planet or that has lived and will live, faced with the same situation would do – they will not have provided the AI with every possible parameter that it could have.

AI is only as good as the information that is available to it. But that regrettably doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t or couldn’t kill a human being as a consequence of working with or within the limitations of what it could ‘learn’ or know.

AI accurately mirrors the limitations of the thinking of its creators. To be all knowing, it would not only have had to have been created by God, It would also have to be God for it to be so.

You can rest assured that if any human being alive possessed this ‘all knowing’, universal and arguably complete level of knowledge and understanding today, the last thing they would be planning to unleash upon the world would be any form of unethical AI.

It is regrettable that the world functions as it does today, with a system that values the financial value of everything or against everything – including the value of human beings, rather than what the value of being human equips us with or what the experience of being a human will allow any of us to understand.

Arguments will be made that sensors and cameras that detect heat, light, moisture, facial expressions and just about every physical change or activity that is exhibited in any particular situation, will equip AI with an understanding of what being human is.

However, consciousness, emotion, empathy and the ability to reflect and to relate to other human beings is not a skill that can simply be programmed into software form – especially when the programmers have not experienced each and every human experience themselves and don’t have the ability to translate that information into programable form(s).

Regrettably, it will not take the experience of just a few of the things that AI will be able to do, to convince anyone who doesn’t think critically about what they are seeing or experiencing to believe that this is not the case.

A reality we face is that because the world is being run by people who don’t relate or even attempt to relate fully to what life is really like for every other human being, beyond the bubble of people who are sharing very similar life experiences to them, we already have massively disproportionate levels of inequality and a world system that is teetering on the edge.

Those responsible for all that is wrong in the world are the very same people whose ethics and ideas are fueling and driving the takeover of AI. The machines that they are responsible for are and will simply continue to be a mirror of the behaviour of their true masters.

The part of the AI problem which is very much the responsibility of the Programmers and the architects of this whole Agenda is that its direction of travel and where it goes next is not under the control of any human or human expert.

Those responsible are unaware of what they don’t know and the machines themselves suffer the same limitations as a direct result.

Because there is no governance that controls the controllers of AI, Artificial Intelligence has already become the expert when it comes to everything that it is enabled to do or which it can learn to do next.

AI quite literally sees in black and white the differences between the nuances of experience and the lack of it, that those in control don’t understand.

As a recent news story from the US Military that was quickly withdrawn made clear, AI that is tasked to function ‘independently’ will stick to any tasks it is given religiously. With the consequence that every action it takes to ensure that its purpose is carried out can and will be perceived as protecting that purpose – no matter the cost, even if that cost should be the life of the AI ‘operator’ which outside of a simulation, could very easily be a real human life.

The self-styled experts of AI don’t know what AI can or what it will be able to do. They cannot and will not recognise the genuine parallels that each and every form of AI has or will have as it is developed, with a human, the human condition or the human self.

Anyone with the level of awareness necessary to see and to identify such parallels would be very unlikely to play any role which furthers the use of AI in these very harmful circumstances.

Such understanding could not be possessed by anyone who cares about humanity at either the individual or collective level and remained prepared to unleash its unknown potential upon the world.

The so-called experts in AI are merely experts that create the operational parameters of AI or instruct AI to do the things that their employers want it to do.

In a recent blog, I talked about the lack of care and consideration for consequence that many of the AI developers themselves have been exhibiting, regarding what some will consider an arguably independent thinking tool, that is already documented for creating unexpected outcomes.

On this basis alone, every time AI of this kind is used, mankind is one step further into a potentially very dark unknown.

However, just like the health conditions caused by eating foods containing ingredients that our bodies simply do not need, or the majority of us being actively encouraged to take on debt and the mental anguish that follows it, just so someone somewhere can make more profit or assume some other form of control, AI is a multifaceted product or tool that is being pushed into our everyday lives. Not because it is genuinely beneficial for all of us if we use it. But because our use of it and the growing reliance that our use will then require that we have, will offer even greater profits and turnover for anyone and any organisation that is invested in its use.

The unfolding tragedy for us all is that we will see ease of use as the benefit, whilst not even realising that we are surrendering the ability to learn, and with it will go our freedom of choice, our independence and personal control.

The hardest pill to swallow when it comes to understanding the realities that underpin the societal role of AI, is that Politicians, the Government and the Establishment do not see or understand that they have anything to gain by seeking to exert any kind of meaningful control over the use and roll-out of AI.

Politics, Government and the Establishment is driven by self-interest, that in its most obvious or relatable form is money or financial gain of some kind.

The reason that AI is being pushed as hard and as quickly upon us as it is possible for them to do so, is that the use of Artificial Intelligence has the ability to revolutionise working practices in ways that mean machines can do many of the jobs that People like you, and I are employed to do today. Not just in factories, but also in highly academic or professional ways.

It is reasonable for any sensible person to assume that if less people are being employed to do jobs, that will mean that the products and services that the companies using the AI systems provide will cost us less as the end consumer.

Regrettably, the world we live in today doesn’t work like that. Any savings that these companies make by reducing the number of staff they use, will be added to their bottom line or profit margin, just as soon as the much lower running and purchase costs for these machines have been taken out and, in all likelihood, offset against their Tax.

These companies, the people who run and influence them and the people who own shares in them are the People that ‘own’ the Political Parties, the Politicians and all of the People who work in positions of authority. The very People who should be acting against the unethical practices and the lack of legislation that is enabling the programmers, money men and owners of companies using AI – to do all that they are already doing and all that they are planning to do.

It is therefore not in the interests of anyone who could do anything to address the AI problem before it becomes one. They are too afraid of what would happen or what they would lose if they did so.