AI Unplugged: It's the End of the World As We Know It

The world's going to end on November 13, 2026. Will #AI help us avert it ... or cause it?

The Doomsday Equation

Heinz von Foerster was an Austrian-American scientist combining physics and philosophy, and widely attributed as the originator of second-order cybernetics. But he is perhaps best known for his Doomsday Equation.

The formula gave 2.7 billion as the 1960 world population and predicted that population growth would become infinite by Friday, November 13, 2026. Based on population data, von Foerster concluded that world population growth rate over the centuries was faster than an exponential growth rate. In the Doomsday Equation, double-timing (the time it takes for a population to double in size), decreased faster and faster over time. Extrapolating that out far enough, and eventually the formula results in the population growing so quickly that in 2026, the population would instantly double.

The Doomsday scenario arises from the concept that if population growth were to continue accelerating at the rate observed by von Foerster and his team, it would eventually reach a point where the Earth could no longer sustain the rapidly growing population. This would lead to a collapse of ecosystems, depletion of resources, and potentially the end of human civilization as we know it.

But there's a caveat: the Doomsday Equation didn't' take into account other factors that can influence population growth, such as technological advancements, changes in fertility rates, and resource management.

The Malthusian Trap

The dark side of von Foerster's population growth arc is Thomas Malthus. Malthus argued that while population growth may be exponential, the growth of the food supply or other resources is linear, which eventually reduces living standards to the point of triggering a population decline. This event, called a Malthusian Trap, occurs when population growth outpaces agricultural production, causing famine or war, resulting in poverty and depopulation. The Trap is linked to political and social movements that end with the same result: catastrophe for the country or region that results in severe population reduction.

The modern version of the Malthusian Trap argues that while technological advancements can temporarily increase income per person, the long-term effects are counterbalanced by population growth resulting from higher reproductive success among those with increased income. As income grows due to technological progress, people tend to have more children, leading to a larger population. This expanded population puts additional pressure on limited resources, such as land, which ultimately restricts the total output of goods and services. Consequently, the initial rise in income per capita resulting from technological progress is eventually offset by the growing population, returning income per capita to its original level before the technological advancements took place. In short, technology only gets you so far.

The Industrial Revolution changed this game. Breaking out of the Malthusian Trap means having tools that spread prosperity around enough so that populations can continue to grow. These gains in productivity, thanks to technology, change the course of population growth, resulting in demographic transition. We've seen this in the United States and the trend is now spreading to other countries. The United Nations Population Fund estimates that the human population may peak in the late 21st century rather than continue to grow until it has exhausted available resources.

So what's the next technological advancement to grow humanity's future? Anyone? Any guesses?

AI to the Rescue?

AI has the potential to help increase productivity even further in ways that weren't possible before. AI-powered automation and innovation might significantly increase agricultural yields, optimize resource management, and streamline manufacturing processes. This boost in productivity could theoretically outpace population growth, ensuring there are enough resources to sustain a larger global population. Additionally, AI can play a role in scientific advancements in areas like clean energy, sustainable agriculture, and disease prevention, all of which could help address challenges associated with population growth.

However, AI's influence extends beyond just resource production. AI can analyze data and optimize resource distribution based on population needs, ensuring a more equitable distribution of food, water, and other essential resources. AI can be used to model climate scenarios, predict extreme weather events, and develop strategies for adaptation and mitigation. This could help us avoid some of the potential catastrophes associated with population growth and resource strain. AI can also monitor resource usage and develop strategies for conservation and sustainable practices. Depending on which industry you focus on, AI could potentially increase productivity anywhere from 40% to 50%.

Is the Singularity Cancelled?

The Singularity -- a hypothetical future point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable consequences for human civilization -- has been tied to artificial intelligence for decades. Predictions vary as to when it's going to happen, with several theorists pinning the date somewhere between 2040 and 2050.

We're at a curious crossroads. If the world's population continues to grow, we'll need technological productivity to save us from ourselves ... but our saviors might just end up taking over.

This doesn't mean AI just fixes everything. AI-powered automation, while creating new jobs, will inevitably displace existing ones, just as the Industrial Revolution did. Additionally, the benefits of AI-driven productivity will probably be unevenly distributed, exacerbating existing social and economic disparities. This is Martin Ford's Technology Paradox:

Martin Ford postulates a "technology paradox" in that before the singularity could occur most routine jobs in the economy would be automated, since this would require a level of technology inferior to that of the singularity. This would cause massive unemployment and plummeting consumer demand, which in turn would destroy the incentive to invest in the technologies that would be required to bring about the Singularity. Job displacement is increasingly no longer limited to those types of work traditionally considered to be "routine".

So who should we believe: von Foerster? Malthus? Ford? Predicting just about anything is folly, but it's a worthy thought experiment to consider where we'll be in the next thirty years and what jobs our children and grandchildren will be working ... if they'll be working at all.

There's evidence that von Foerster did not take his equation entirely seriously, so perhaps we shouldn't either: November 13, 2026 would be von Foerster's 115th birthday.

Please Note: The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not necessarily represent those of my employer or any other organization.