Robot Hand Holding Cash Getty Images/Paper Boat Creative
The world experienced a seismic shift in November 2022 when Chatgpt from San Francisco, a generative AI-Chatbot, was introduced into the audience. Just like the arrival of the internet in the mid -nineties, artificial intelligence is impressive for its time, but only a glimpse of what is coming.
AI has already transformed every walk of life. But it also takes away many of us: will artificial intelligence be the great equalizer or just another tool for the rich to get richer?
Artificial intelligence makes our lives easier, but it has also started replacing a few jobs. This has concerned many that this technology could make them superfluous in the workforce and worsen the inequality of wealth.
A study by Ipsos showed that 50% of Americans believe that the increased use of AI will result in greater income inequality and a more polarized society. About 64% believe that governments should take action to prevent AI from taking on the jobs of people, and 46% of the younger generation believe that it is likely or at least somewhat likely that they will be their job within the next five years Losing AI.
But according to Taylor Jo Isenberg, executive director of the economic security project, the way in which AI influences economic inequality will largely depend on the decisions made in the following decade. “We are at a critical moment. The choices we make in the coming decade will determine whether we will give a vision of broad prosperity or further anchor the economic and political power in the hands of a few, “she explained.
If it is not checked, companies that are powered by profit incentives can develop AI in ways that concentrate wealth and power to the top. However, Isenberg is of the opinion that if governments can use smart policy, such as interoperability and non -discrimination, they can promote innovation in the AI space and at the same time prevent monopolization. The intervention of the government can also help to solve social problems that may not have connected a large payment day to them, such as health care and medicine.
“If we penetrate the government with the expertise to proactively regulate, build public infrastructure to guarantee access and affordability and to double on fair and healthy competition in industry, I think we start pretty well,” Isenberg said. “However, I think it will take political muscles and real leadership to put us on that process, given the enormous interest in the current course of leting a few players dominate the industry.”
Carlos Gershenson-Garcia, a Suny Empire Innovation Professor at the Department of Systems Science and Industrial Engineering at Binghamton University, agrees. “The taxing of successful AI companies and investing those resources in broader areas such as health care and education would be wise,” he said. “The problem is that these companies finance and lobby politicians, making them a huge leverage about the government.”
AI has the potential to broaden the wealth gap not only in our country, but also worldwide.
In a recent analysis, the International Monetary Fund staff investigated the potential impact of AI on global workers using an AI paratreatic index. After assessing the readiness of 125 countries on the basis of areas such as digital infrastructure, human capital and labor market policy, they discovered that richer economies are usually better equipped for AI adoption than countries with Singapore, the US and Denmark. The road.
In other words, because rich countries have the infrastructure and competent workforce to make use of the benefits of AI, they can see greater increased productivity and economic growth. In the meantime, fewer developed countries that lack the necessary technology and training programs will run the risk of walking on. As AI technology accelerates over time in rich countries, it can only make the inequality that already exists in countries.
Large technology companies that lead the AI revolution, such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft and OpenAi, gather an enormous amount of wealth. And because these companies dominate cloud computing, data access and AI research, it makes it difficult for smaller companies and individuals to compete. Likewise, richer countries with the infrastructure and capital to invest in artificial intelligence will pick the benefits, while countries with a lower income will be left in the dust.
There are also winners and losers on the labor market. Because some jobs are gradually automated, it will be affected by employees with a lower income and less trained employees, because they often do not have the financial resources to increase themselves. On the other hand, the future seems quite promising for employees with expertise in AI, Machine Learning and Data Science, but not everyone has access to the training and training needed to break into these areas.
That said, Gershenon-Garcia thinks that the fear of AI who takes over all jobs can be somewhat exaggerated.
“It seems that AI is accepting our jobs, but should reveal a closer consideration of the statistics that the change does not differ so much from previous technologies that had a similar effect,” he said. “We can learn from what worked and what was not in those earlier cases and implementing programs to minimize an adverse effect on staff.”
Johnny Gabriele, chief analyst of Blockchain -economics and AI integration in the lifted initiative, sees AI as part of a broader shift in technological evolution. He believes that AI will follow the historical trend of broadening wealth inequality, unless financial structures change fundamentally.
“Looking back on history, great technological jumps have only broadened wealth inequality. In my opinion, the only technology that has the power to do the opposite is cryptocurrency. “Said Gabriele. “At the end of the day, this technical revolution will reward those who can control it and punish those who ignore it. If things get bad enough, there are already conversations about universal basic income, but the jury is still out whether this will lead to utopia or dystopia. “
He believes that as long as our financial structures retain their centralization, the riches will become richer and the poor will become poorer. “At the end of the day it is centralization, not on technology, which influences wealth and equality,” he explained.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
