‘Despite AI, we humans remain in charge’

Let’s start with a quote from Google CEO Sundar Pichai. It reads: “Artificial intelligence is the most important thing humanity has ever faced. I believe it will change the world more than electricity or fire.” Is that grossly exaggerated – or do you share this view?
I share this assessment at least in part because I am very optimistic about the future of technology, especially artificial intelligence. AI is a transformative technology and like electricity, it is also a universal technology. All sectors of the economy and all countries will benefit. AI will change everything, schools, our healthcare and our workplace.

And is therefore the most important innovation of all time, as Pichai says?
I don’t quite agree. I think space exploration will also be a very transformative technology.

However, there is also a completely opposite statement. Vaclav Smil, a great energy expert and Bill Gates’ favorite scientist, says in his latest book: The four crucial things that affect our lives are steel, cement, plastic and ammonia – and they will always be. What do you say to him?
Innovation comes in many different forms. So it’s not about deciding which innovation is better than the others. The Corona crisis has also shown that we depend on a global supply chain. We must therefore link traditional innovations to those of the future. This is the only way we can face the challenges of the future: demographics, global warming, poverty, etc.

Let’s get more specific. AI is about to revolutionize the financial world. Algorithms guide investments, digital central bank money is discussed. What’s next?
In the financial world in particular, there are many possible applications for AI, whether for better risk assessment or for granting credit. AI will make banks more efficient, but also enable new applications that benefit customers.

Will it one day make banks obsolete?
When it comes to cryptocurrencies, we are already talking about DAOs, the decentralized autonomous organizations that do not need middlemen. In such organizations, loans can actually be provided by AI-driven systems that do not need banks. I wonder if traditional banks will embrace this new generation of tools?

Then there will no longer be a need for bank staff.
Yes, there will always be. The point is that man and machine work together optimally. The human mind is still much more flexible than AI and can adapt more quickly to changing circumstances. I therefore believe in a hybrid development. Man and machine will complement each other, not compete with each other.

You talk about DAOs. Does this mean we have a future without central banks?
No, it still needs an institution that sets the rules of the financial world. Innovation is great, but it also needs a guardrail. This is the only way we can avoid a chaos in which ruthless scammers gain the upper hand. We must ensure that innovation and responsibility go hand in hand. But central banks also need to evolve.

Central banks can become even more important, for example if digital currencies are introduced, such as a digital franc or a digital dollar. Then we would all have an account with the central bank and no longer with a commercial bank.
The digitization of money is already progressing. However, I am convinced that a decentralized solution offers more security from an architectural point of view. I think the blockchain will play an increasingly important role in the financial system of the future. Because it allows you to track transactions in real time. This creates more transparency and more resilience over time.

The hype around blockchains is waning. The lofty promises have not yet been fulfilled.
The same can be said about self-driving cars or other next-generation technologies. A few years ago people were still enthusiastic about it. But innovations do not develop linearly.

How?
In a so-called J-curve. This means that there may even be a decline in the beginning because the system is not yet equipped for the innovations. If this is the case, innovations develop exponentially. They literally explode and clearly exceed the linear expectations set in them.

What are you specifically thinking about?
To the internet or to the smartphone, for example. Both had a rocky start and lo and behold, the largest companies in the world are the result of these two megatrends.

They say future blockchain-based systems will be more secure. But what about the hacker risk?
Internet crime is currently on the rise. I agree: cybercrime is one of the biggest threats we will face in the future. As more and more areas are digitized, this danger will not disappear any time soon. This is exactly why blockchain and decentralization are so important. Such systems are much more difficult to hack than centralized monster systems.

Unfortunately, these systems require a lot of energy. In times of global warming, this is sub-optimal. In the future, will there be blockchain-based systems that are not energy guzzlers?
In my opinion, Bitcoin has been very inefficient in terms of energy so far. But blockchains evolve. For example, Ethereum has already reduced its energy consumption to a fraction. In addition, renewable energy will play an important role in the functioning of these systems.

Speed ​​will also be an issue. Compared to the major credit card companies, a bitcoin transaction still takes a long time.
Who says bitcoin is the cryptocurrency that will prevail in the long run? Do you remember the early days of the internet? Then the future seemed to belong to America Online (AOL) or Netscape. Where are these companies today? I think we will see similar developments in the future.

Aren’t we traveling too fast? Even Elon Musk, along with other tech giants, has signed a manifesto calling for an end to the march. Do you share their concerns?
I understand the fear. Change is what most upsets people, and rapid changes like the ones we are witnessing amplify those insecurities. Nevertheless, we must be clear: challenges await us that we can only overcome with technical innovations. AI alone can’t do this, and yes, we need rules and guardrails to make sure AI doesn’t get out of hand. But under no circumstances should we nip innovation in the bud.

What about the loss of privacy? Or with the fact that AI decides today whether I get a job or a loan?
There is no denying that a large part of our lives is already governed by algorithms. Many of these algorithms are still too clumsy. Ironically, we therefore need more data to fine-tune them. At the same time, we must ensure that the data is destroyed when it is no longer needed.

They emphasize the immense importance of innovation. However, as more and more areas become dominated by AI, innovation will also decline. Uniformity spreads, doesn’t it?
No. This fear has also spread in the course of globalization. All people buy the same things, all cities look the same, etc. From today’s perspective one can say yes, globalization has contributed to standardization to some extent. But it has also led to a stronger emphasis on the uniqueness of different cultures. Take Netflix for example: some of the most important programs come from Asia or South America. The leveler’s thesis has not been confirmed. It won’t confirm itself with the AI ​​either.

And finally, what about the mother of all fears, namely: AI is taking over – and we humans are tolerated as pets at best?
I am a big fan of science fiction, I know Matrix, Terminator and whatever they are called. The fears expressed in these films are an overreaction. We humans will be in control. That can only change if there is a singularity when human intelligence and AI merge. If that ever happens, we’re still at least 200 years away.